Jump to content

Dave Aranda Is Baylor's New Head Coach

Vic Mackey

By Vic Mackey
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

markstanco

markstanco 12773

Posted
Posted
It’s a good hire, but he’s worked with nothing but superb talent. We’ll see.
This is a good point in his career. Now he is the assembler. The OC hire is questionable for sure. I'm just a guy on a forum who knows nothing but that hire to me seems like a reach. He only played one ranked team and got drilled, and Texas out schemed him with a fill in DC with only 6 or 7 practices. Odd choice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texifornia

texifornia 58816

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, BearSchlong said:
3 hours ago, A’Dam Psycho said:
This is somewhere between a meh to bad hire. A defensive minded coach with no experience in the Big 12. I just don’t see it 

Lmao. Kinda like Rhule. Well played.

While that's obviously correct, at least Rhule had HC experience. The direct DC-to-P5 HC path has been treacherous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BearSchlong

BearSchlong 8233

Posted
Posted

Here ya go chief


1a6ba18503f9a52123dceb4730a6541f.jpg
I actually watched that game from behind Troy's bench. That troy team went 12-2 that year. They were playing with their hair on fire all game long and a lethargic LSU team almost pulled off a late victory on pure talent.

I've been to a lot of SEC conference games in Baton Rouge prior to and after that game and that one day was an outlier, just no fire and focus until after Halftime.

Orgeron has pointed to that game multiple times as the low water mark that rose into what we saw this past Monday.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BearSchlong

BearSchlong 8233

Posted
Posted
It might end up being a great hire but they hired a coordinator with zero head coaching experience. It's a huge risk and nobody really has a clue how it will turn out.
People are also drastically overrating Rhule's tenure at Baylor. I know it was a rebuild and Rhule did some great things. He also went 19-20 at Baylor with a losing record in the Big 12. Baylor's roster is in complete rebuild mode again and it's just as likely Rhule's year 4 was going to be similar to year 1 and 2. People talk about Rhule like he stacked 3 or 4 good seasons at Baylor. 
Oh bullshit. Rhule proved repeatedly that the process produced the next man up. I thought the season was done when Clay Johnston got bmhurt, but then the D actually improved. Only thing certain is that rhules ass got flogged by the Panthers money whip.

Best thing about being Baylor is low expectations. We lose to UT and its oh well, even St. Teaff only went .500 against them. UT loses to Baylor and its "fire Mack!, Fire Tom!" Were good at getting your coaches fired. Hell, your players did well in the bowl game because they weren't overcoached. Well that and playing the Pac12. . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texasstrong12

texasstrong12 4668

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, BearSchlong said:

Oh bullshit. Rhule proved repeatedly that the process produced the next man up. I thought the season was done when Clay Johnston got bmhurt, but then the D actually improved. Only thing certain is that rhules ass got flogged by the Panthers money whip.

Best thing about being Baylor is low expectations. We lose to UT and its oh well, even St. Teaff only went .500 against them. UT loses to Baylor and its "fire Mack!, Fire Tom!" Were good at getting your coaches fired. Hell, your players did well in the bowl game because they weren't overcoached. Well that and playing the Pac12. . .

If it was just "next man up" Rhule wouldn't have gone 8-17 in the first two years.

Baylor is losing 9/11 of its top tacklers, top RB, top WR, and Brewer has injury issues. Rhule isn't an idiot and you can bet that factored into his decision to leave for the NFL.  

Edited by texasstrong12
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BearSchlong

BearSchlong 8233

Posted
Posted
If it was just "next man up" Rhule wouldn't have gone 8-17 in the first two years.

Baylor is losing 9/11 of its top tacklers, top RB, top WR, and Brewer has injury issues. Rhule isn't an idiot and you can bet that factored into his decision to leave for the NFL.  

Right, he comes to campus and there is exactly 1 commit. He miraculously turns the program around in spring ball.

 

You're not very bright, are you?

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dogg

Horn Dogg 4278

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Wishbone said:

We ought to beat Baylor’s ass every year regardless of who they hire. That we haven’t lately is is our current problem and rests entirely on us.

Remember back when we pretty much beat everyone’s ass in the big 12 on a regular basis?  That shit was pretty cool.  The last 10 years have been some kind of alternate reality where we had to worry about TCU, Okie State, Baylor, etc.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cajun

Cajun 11771

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, markstanco said:
2 hours ago, The Earl of Texas said:
It’s a good hire, but he’s worked with nothing but superb talent. We’ll see.

This is a good point in his career. Now he is the assembler. The OC hire is questionable for sure. I'm just a guy on a forum who knows nothing but that hire to me seems like a reach. He only played one ranked team and got drilled, and Texas out schemed him with a fill in DC with only 6 or 7 practices. Odd choice.

If you think about it, Texas kinda had its way with Aranda too.

Offense bailed him out of an outing where his D got throttled.  Lucky for Aranda, Todd said, "Hold my beer".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texifornia

texifornia 58816

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, texasstrong12 said:

If it was just "next man up" Rhule wouldn't have gone 8-17 in the first two years.

Baylor is losing 9/11 of its top tacklers, top RB, top WR, and Brewer has injury issues. Rhule isn't an idiot and you can bet that factored into his decision to leave for the NFL.  

Rhule did a good job dude, don't be an asshat. He started from pretty much zero and rebuilt the program both football-wise and culturally far better than it or most of its fans deserved.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 34407

Posted
Posted

Sure he did a good job, but the Bear is also saying dumb shit like Rhule continuously proved his next man up philosophy worked after exactly one decent season that resulted in zero hardware. That's not continuously proving anything. 

Rhule was very good but the upside to having a gutted program is that in a few years you have a senior and very experienced junior laden squad by necessity. To his great credit he coached them up and took tremendous advantage of that, but he was going to take a big step back next year and denying that is silly. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cochamps

cochamps 1885

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, BearSchlong said:

Oh bullshit. Rhule proved repeatedly that the process produced the next man up. I thought the season was done when Clay Johnston got bmhurt, but then the D actually improved. Only thing certain is that rhules ass got flogged by the Panthers money whip.

Best thing about being Baylor is low expectations. We lose to UT and its oh well, even St. Teaff only went .500 against them. UT loses to Baylor and its "fire Mack!, Fire Tom!" Were good at getting your coaches fired. Hell, your players did well in the bowl game because they weren't overcoached. Well that and playing the Pac12. . .

We’re just good at being told we’re no good.  Hell we beat mighty Georgia.  Of course, aggy decided that the Bulldawgs didn’t wanna be there.

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texasstrong12

texasstrong12 4668

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Sure he did a good job, but the Bear is also saying dumb shit like Rhule continuously proved his next man up philosophy worked after exactly one decent season that resulted in zero hardware. That's not continuously proving anything. 

Rhule was very good but the upside to having a gutted program is that in a few years you have a senior and very experienced junior laden squad by necessity. To his great credit he coached them up and took tremendous advantage of that, but he was going to take a big step back next year and denying that is silly. 

Exactly. Both these things can be true. 

Rhule did a good job but he's given way too much credit for a roster that was primarily upperclassmen. It's just as likely next year is going to be a rebuild when you look at what Baylor loses off this year's roster. 

Plenty of coaches have decent to good years (especially with an upperclassmen roster). It's weird how defensive people get over Rhule and I think he's a good coach. He was 19-20 with a likely rebuild coming in year 4 and people act like he accomplished something never seen before in the history of college football. Take away a couple lucky breaks against Iowa State, TCU and blown call against Texas Tech then what? 

Plus this. 

 

Edited by texasstrong12
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texasstrong12

texasstrong12 4668

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, irishtexan said:

Rhule is a great college coach who did an amazing job at Baylor. Much better than any of us predicted he would do. There isn’t a reason to make it more complicated than that.

We have a different definition of "great". Good for sure. 

I get Temple and Baylor are tough places to win but a 32-27 conference record, only 1 top 25 finish, and 1 bowl win in 7 years isn't "great". Context obviously matters but if we excluded the context we would say this is below average. 

Edited by texasstrong12
Link to comment
Share on other sites
closetojumping

closetojumping 65286

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, texasstrong12 said:

We have a different definition of "great". Good for sure. 

I get Temple and Baylor are tough places to win but a 32-27 conference record, only 1 top 25 finish, and 1 bowl win in 7 years isn't "great". Context obviously matters but if we excluded the context we would say this is below average. 

Why the fuck would context be excluded? That’s as idiotic as anything written on this board lately, and that’s saying something. Congrats. 

I’m not going to dig into this discussion much, but this dude won double digit games twice and blew out a regional power at a program that had won double digit games once in their fucking history and never blew out anyone, much less Penn State. Then he turned around a scandal-laden program at Baylor and looked better doing it in year 3 than fucking Herman did in year 3 about 90 miles south. 

Fuck off with the equivocating and rationalizing. No one here has an affinity for Rhule. We can still look at what he did and, in fact, given context say he looks pretty great as a HC early in his career. 

9 hours ago, BearSchlong said:

Oh bullshit. Rhule proved repeatedly that the process produced the next man up. I thought the season was done when Clay Johnston got bmhurt, but then the D actually improved. Only thing certain is that rhules ass got flogged by the Panthers money whip.

Best thing about being Baylor is low expectations. We lose to UT and its oh well, even St. Teaff only went .500 against them. UT loses to Baylor and its "fire Mack!, Fire Tom!" Were good at getting your coaches fired. Hell, your players did well in the bowl game because they weren't overcoached. Well that and playing the Pac12. . .

The worst thing about Baylor though? High tolerance for murder, rape enablement, and general corruption. So it seems like a bit of mixed bag. Congrats on your choice in alma mater though. You get to have low expectations plus rape and murder. That’s the trifecta, sir. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, Js1 said:

Andy Ludwig?? The OC who was shut down by an interim Texas DC who installed a new scheme in 8 practices??

I wouldn't base my opinion on a single game.  Overall, he's done a good job this season and did a good job at his last stop as well.  Overall seems like an okay hire for OC but without much upside.  

Edited by Fozzz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texasstrong12

texasstrong12 4668

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

Why the fuck would context be excluded? That’s as idiotic as anything written on this board lately, and that’s saying something. Congrats. 

I’m not going to dig into this discussion much, but this dude won double digit games twice and blew out a regional power at a program that had won double digit games once in their fucking history and never blew out anyone, much less Penn State. Then he turned around a scandal-laden program at Baylor and looked better doing it in year 3 than fucking Herman did in year 3 about 90 miles south. 

Fuck off with the equivocating and rationalizing. No one here has an affinity for Rhule. We can still look at what he did and, in fact, given context say he looks pretty great as a HC early in his career. 

 

Agree to disagree. You can play the context game all you want but at the end of the day a 32-27 conference record, 1 top 25 finish, and 1 bowl win in 7 years isn't "great". When you dig further Rhule's record was also awful against the top tier teams. 

Good coach for sure. Great....nah. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
closetojumping

closetojumping 65286

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, texasstrong12 said:

Agree to disagree. You can play the context game all you want but at the end of the day a 32-27 conference record, 1 top 25 finish, and 1 bowl win in 7 years isn't "great". When you dig further Rhule's record was also awful against the top tier teams. 

Good coach for sure. Great....nah. 

Removing context is not some sort of taste preference. It’s trading objectivity for subjectivity. It’s flatly corrupt in terms of rhetoric. So go fuck yourself with that behavior and “agree to disagree”. If you want me to start taking snippets of shit that you say here and constructing them elsewhere without context to paint you into being a retarded clown, I can do that. Any idiot can. That’s the ethical problem with “hey, let’s remove context and everyone just be okay with it”.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Walden Ponderer

Walden Ponderer 12639

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

It’s trading objectivity for subjectivity.

While I agree with you about context being important, the fact is that the whole debate is subjective. Where's the line between "really good" and "great"?

For my money, Rhule has proven himself to be at least as good as Gary Barnett, which would not be "great". But that's just a subjective speculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mitch Cumsteen

Mitch Cumsteen 18913

Posted
Posted

I just don't get how anyone can look at what he took over in Waco or at Temple for that matter, and not say he did a great job. It's like looking at Bill Snyder and saying he was only 8 games over .500 for his career so he wasn't great either. To paraphrase our great leader, winning is really really hard. Winning at fucking Temple or taking over at the rape factory when the fan is covered in shit is borderline impossible. 

That said, it's also important to note that Baylor caught all sorts of breaks this year. They won two double overtime games against Tech and TCU. They won field goal games against WVU and Iowa State. And they played a nonconference schedule that the SEC would be ashamed of. It wasn't going to get any better at Baylor than it was this year. Everything broke right for them. Rhule was smart to get out when he did. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
closetojumping

closetojumping 65286

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Walden Ponderer said:

While I agree with you about context being important, the fact is that the whole debate is subjective. Where's the line between "really good" and "great"?

For my money, Rhule has proven himself to be at least as good as Gary Barnett, which would not be "great". But that's just a subjective speculation.

The concept of removing context unlocks the ability to remove any point, phrase, fact, theme,  or tone from a discussion or situation and reframe select words or facts elsewhere to the perpetrator's advantage. It is the foundation of propaganda, a core component of yellow journalism, a primary tenet of every female’s arguing position with a significant other ever, and the basis for what has become the social media sphere. But yeah, let’s debate what a “fact” is. 

I think a “fact” is that Temple was a bottom dwelling program of the FBS that had only won 10 games once and was almost kicked out of a conference at the turn of this millennium because they sucked so bad at football. I think of such a matter as a fact because I can verify everything I just wrote with a simple google search and I was alive for much of it.

I think a “fact” is that Baylor had a public scandal on their hands making it hard for them to find local quality candidates. A fact is they had to ignominiously fire their head coach who had a huge following from staff and alumni, leaving acrimony towards the program as evidenced by articles on the situation from the time, and the “truth don’t lie” movement from the fans and staff on social media. This led to them hiring the retired Jim Grobe as a stand-in while they figured out something. Then they lost their roster by over 20% due to the scandal. 

Enter Matt Rhule in both circumstances, with double digit win seasons and blue blood-ish blowouts to follow. 

All of that is “context” supporting the position that dimming down what he accomplished is specious. Attempts to rationalize thoughts on the guy otherwise *by removing context* should be fucking anathema to everyone posting here. Specifically the academic dorks such as yourself should view it as fucking poison. 

Edited by closetojumping
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Walden Ponderer

Walden Ponderer 12639

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

All of that is “context” supporting the position that dimming down what he accomplished is specious. Attempts to rationalize thoughts on the guy otherwise *by removing context* should be fucking anathema to everyone posting here. Specifically the academic dorks such as yourself should view it as fucking poison. 

All of that is only true up to a point. Describing what he did at Temple and Baylor as "great accomplishments" is close to tautological. But making the leap to assuming that means he is a "great coach" skips over dozens of other factors that go into the debate over one's place in the hierarchy of coaching, and is, frankly, every bit as lazy as someone who simply wants to throw out context of time and place to just look at overall records, records vs. AP ranked teams, etc.

"Did he do a great job?" is a completely different fucking question from "Is he a great coach?" and to pretend otherwise is to dabble in a quixotic quest for the anus of an Aurelia aurita. How you answer those questions, of course, makes no fucking difference to me whatsoever, because they are subjective and insignificant. Much like I suspect the career of one Matt Rhule will be viewed in 20 years, great job at two perennially impossible stops, or no.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texasstrong12

texasstrong12 4668

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, closetojumping said:

Removing context is not some sort of taste preference. It’s trading objectivity for subjectivity. It’s flatly corrupt in terms of rhetoric. So go fuck yourself with that behavior and “agree to disagree”. If you want me to start taking snippets of shit that you say here and constructing them elsewhere without context to paint you into being a retarded clown, I can do that. Any idiot can. That’s the ethical problem with “hey, let’s remove context and everyone just be okay with it”.

You just said Tom Allen hasn't proven anything yet because he stacked wins against bad teams. Why don't you hold Rhule to the same standard? It's not like Indiana is an easy school to win at. 

Temple's 2013 wins: Army (3-9), Memphis (3-9)

Temple's 2014 wins: Vandy (3-9), Deleware State (2-10), UCONN (2-10), Tulsa (2-10), East Carolina (8-5), Tulane (3-9)

Temple's 2015 wins: Penn State (7-6), Cincinnati (7-6), UMASS (3-9), Charlotte (2-10), Tulane (3-9), UCF (0-12), East Carolina (5-7), SMU (2-10), Memphis (9-4), UCONN (6-7)

Temple's 2016 wins: Stony Brook (5-6), Charlotte (4-8), SMU (5-7), UCF (6-7), Cincinnati (4-8), UCONN (3-9), Tulane (4-8), East Carolina (3-9), Navy (9-5), South Florida (11-2) 

Baylor's 2017 wins: Kansas (1-11)

Baylor's 2018 wins: Abilene Christian (6-5), UTSA (3-9), Kansas (3-9), K-State (5-7), OK State (7-6), Texas Tech (5-7), Vanderbilt (6-7), 

Baylor's 2019 wins: SFA (3-9), UTSA (4-8), Rice (3-9), Iowa State (7-6), K-State (8-5), Texas Tech (4-8), OK State (8-5), WV (5-7), TCU (5-7), Texas (8-5), Kansas (3-9)

 

*Wins against teams that were a combined 218-353. So teams that averaged a .38 winning percentage. 

*76.5% of Rhule's wins are against teams that had a losing record. More like 80% if you only include D1 teams. We make fun of aggy for stacking wins against bad teams that don't have a winning record yet here we are calling Rhule a great coach when he does the same thing. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by texasstrong12
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texasstrong12

texasstrong12 4668

Posted
Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

Enter Matt Rhule in both circumstances, with double digit win seasons and blue blood-ish blowouts to follow. 

 

I don't know why you keep using this argument. Texas wasn't good this year and Penn State wasn't good either in 2015. People are ready to run off Herman and Penn State fans were ready to run off Franklin after the 7-6 record in '15. 

I guess beating two teams that are/were ready to fire their head coaches = great wins. 

You keep talking about context while at the same time excluding context. I guess beating Nebraska is a quality win right now. 

Edited by texasstrong12
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
closetojumping

closetojumping 65286

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Walden Ponderer said:

All of that is only true up to a point. Describing what he did at Temple and Baylor as "great accomplishments" is close to tautological. But making the leap to assuming that means he is a "great coach" skips over dozens of other factors that go into the debate over one's place in the hierarchy of coaching, and is, frankly, every bit as lazy as someone who simply wants to throw out context of time and place to just look at overall records, records vs. AP ranked teams, etc.

"Did he do a great job?" is a completely different fucking question from "Is he a great coach?" and to pretend otherwise is to dabble in a quixotic quest for the anus of an Aurelia aurita. How you answer those questions, of course, makes no fucking difference to me whatsoever, because they are subjective and insignificant. Much like I suspect the career of one Matt Rhule will be viewed in 20 years, great job at two perennially impossible stops, or no.

Let's be clear, I used the word "great" one time. I used it in this context "Why the fuck would context be excluded? That’s as idiotic as anything written on this board lately, and that’s saying something. Congrats. 

I’m not going to dig into this discussion much, but this dude won double digit games twice and blew out a regional power at a program that had won double digit games once in their fucking history and never blew out anyone, much less Penn State. Then he turned around a scandal-laden program at Baylor and looked better doing it in year 3 than fucking Herman did in year 3 about 90 miles south. 

Fuck off with the equivocating and rationalizing. No one here has an affinity for Rhule. We can still look at what he did and, in fact, given context say he looks pretty great as a HC early in his career. "

So I never referenced a "great accomplishment" and I qualified use of the term in context, directly addressing someone else's premise of "let's remove context", which should draw a fucking reaction. If it doesn't, what is the point of discussing anything here, with anyone? There are no small corruptions. Start doing that shit and we go from chaos to randomness. One I enjoy, the other I deal with, same as the rest of the world. In this instance, if that's where we're all good in heading towards, I'll just find another place to play. I don't think it is, but your indifference to it isn't a good sign.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Walden Ponderer

Walden Ponderer 12639

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, closetojumping said:

There are no small corruptions. Start doing that shit and we go from chaos to randomness.

Don't die on that hill. Just. Don't. Do. It.

You'll make me start asking you about how often you go above the speed limit, cheat on your diet, lie to your doctor, grip a little extra tight on a handshake, etc. ad nauseum. Life is almost nothing but small corruptions. The key is learning which ones matter, and which ones don't. For the record, anybody's opinion of Matt Rhule, save maybe for Mrs. Rhule's, doesn't fucking matter. So I'm cool with dropping it.

This discussion is absolutely pointless. But important? No fucking way. Not important if done well, not important if done like a Dadaist dissertation. Not. Important. It won't lead to the end of rational discourse any more than it will end world hunger. It can't do anything good, but it also can't do anything bad. It's simply either charming or tedious. I got to use a Pixar gif, so I'll call it charming. You can have it your way, though, and let it give you acid reflux.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...