In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 222
Online now 288 Record: 7224 (2/22/2012)
The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns
The place for off topic discussion on Hookem
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
What has been the underlying change in the Baylor athletic program that has led to so much success in the past few years? They've made some outstanding hires in football and men's and women's basketball but there has to be something else too. They've gone from nearly be banished from the Big 12 to a Heisman, a top 25 football team that signs ranked classes, to a multiple Elite 8 basketball program with top 10 men's classes and a national title with another probably coming. That's major turn around in a few years.
Go watch Pony Exce$$, that should tell you all you need to know.
Baylor is close to home for LOTS of quality Division 1 athletes that get missed by us, the Ags, and OU.
Texas is full of Baptist parents who want their kids to attend a religious institution.
The question for me is not why is Baylor successful, but why hasn't Baylor been more successful in the past 20 years.
ah yes. The easy answer.
They've made some good coaching hires. Mulkey was very successful at every level in basketball and coached under a legend. Drew is Drew. Briles also has a long track record of success and clearly has a pretty good eye for talent. They all recruit their collective asses off and it would seem they coach them well.
Very real chance it continues and is not a 2, 3, 4 year anomaly.
I've asked my Baylor in-laws this same very question. (2 brother-in-laws and 2 sister in-laws who are very ready to remind me of their recent success!) Their impression is that there is an allure for many of the athletes parents that their child is going to a safe, faith based school. They have also alluded that there is lower academic requirements for athletes at Baylor compared to Texas, but I have not seen any proof of this.
Their coaches do not bring in blue chip players and sit on the side lines expecting to watch a good game. They bring in coachable players and develop them into a team. Blue chippers are not interested in an education. They want to be seen by pro scouts then they are off in an instant when they see the dollar figures. When UT goes out and pays the Duke women's basketball coach a million dollars a year to come to UT and start a program that would be similar to Duke's, they learned a hard and expensive lesson. It does not work that way. Many great players are over looked simply because they are not blue chip quality. A smart kid is just as good as any. Ask RGIII
Couln't agree more. People have to stop responding to our competion in derogatory terms. They are doing well because they made better hires than we did and the better hires are doing what really good people do. They work at the task and produce desirable results. Art Briles is an outstanding young Coach and he did well with the UH program before his move to Baylor. For instance, we did not think the Heisman trophy winner of the past season--soon to be #2 player taken in the NFL--was good enough to play QB for us. He, on the other hand, did. I think that says it all.
Another case in point, is we stopped doing the job after the NC class and the results became apparent in 2010; but anybody who was watching could see it coming from 2007 and 2008 years. We couldn't run the ball to save our lives. We also were making some very interesting chioces at RB. People we passed on became stars at our competitors. Our OL recruits were terribly weak. Don't blame the recruits blame the people that did the evaluation and also did the developing. We couldn't block Central Florida for crying out loud.
The DT was just as bad. It seems everything fell apart after the kid from El Paso,Andre, blew up. Instead of having four great DTs rotating we often really had one really good player and a couple of average players. Our LBing corps was also a patch work of interesting choices. Last years LBs and this years are the types that are drafted. How many LBs have made it to the next level in recent years. We have DEs. So things are better because we really have some great hires and they are doing what great hires do.
In BB, Baylor has done an outstanding job of recruiting players--see rivals over the last several years.They always seem to have a good mixture of blue chip and non blue chippers and have done an outstanding job of developing them.The leaders of this elite 8 squad are upperclassmen. When did we last have that? Don't be jealous of the performance of our competition, blame our own ineptness.Our inability to figure it out quickly enough to make changes when things are not going in the right direction. We are comfortable is why.
This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by horn4life1 2 years ago
Briles has a great eye for talent and is a great recruiter.
Not sure that those stating pony excess are far off with regards to mens basketball and football. While at Stephenville I believe there was an article about the things they were doing that were against the rules...steroids. People who feel faith based school is important to national top 100 basketball recruits need to quit drinking the coolaid. The fact of the matter is college basketball is dirty and the ncaa recognizes as their cash cow and will rarely get involved. All this rambling aside, briles and Drew were good hires.
Texas' poor evaluations & recruiting RGIII as DB/ATH helped with BAY getting better...does anybody believe Harsin & Wyatt would've passed on RGII @ QB & Wright @ WR?
This post was edited by mcb0703 2 years ago
Given Baylor's success, the real elephant in the room is Why hasn't A&M done better? What is so interesting is that both their fans and their administration essentually gave up on them having the ability to compete with Texas, thought they need an edge, and ran to the SEC.
You have to read between the lines to see this discouraged perspective, but it is evident in some of their quotes and statements about leaving for the SEC. But the recruits haven't see it that way yet. A&M still seems to be the preferred choice over Baylor. That might change in the next couple of years depending on Briles' ability to recover after RGIII.
We thought TCU was the repl;acement for A&M, but maybe it's Baylor that has stepped up to to that spot, with TCU taking their #3 spot.
Inmates running the asylum in B-CS
I think Baylor having a president who wants the school to be successful in all areas of university life has helped them as much as anything.
You hire the right people. Give them all the tools they need to succeed. Support them at every opportunity. Sit back and enjoy the results.
Their AD has made really good hires and they've stuck it out. Because of that money and interest is starting to flow into their school/department. Theyve recently upgraded their basketball practice facilities and football is next. Expect FB recruiting to really take off once the stadium comes closer to fruition.
You have NO idea what you're talking about. Baseless rhetoric.
In response to Old Tascosa, it's not the elephant in the room. It's pretty obvious that A&M made a poor hire in Fran and the wrong hire in Sherman. Sherman lost the team last year, but left the team in a MUCH better place than when Fran left.
Baylor has done well in Football with RGIII and the real test is going to be this year. Their D is atrocious and is something that really has to change if they want the past 2 years to not be an anomaly. Baylor has never been #3 in the state until the past year. Tech has been historically better as has TCU.
I do. I think Harsin would have been all over Luck instead of Griffin. As for Wright, I can imagine Wyatt going after Fuller, Buckner, Stonum, Omarius Hines, Antoine Hicks, or a number of other WR prospects in the state or outside the state that year. Let's not act like Wright was a recognized world beater coming out of high school. Aside from OU, the remainder of his offer list wasn't really a who's who of college football at the time.
You must be off your feed. Took you all of 4 hours to sniff this out.
The same reason why the Cowboys won two SBs under JJ and one using his players and have not come close since. Some people are better at these things than others. A & M is full of bluster and egocentricity but have struggled with hiring the right people. It's a question of their ego overwhelming the reasing factor. Maybe they finally came around to finding the right person. We shall observe.
Way back when, they had Jackie Sherill who was a good hire until the cheating but they fielded some great teams. They gave us fits. Lou Holz's Hogs were always a handful. We had some terrific battles with them and they were honorable in how they did things.
I think A & M always had the resources to compete in the state. It is just that in the last 14 years we have had a better headman. It is a credit to Coach Brown. They were begining to get something going with Gillespie in BB but couldn't keep him and they lost him to Kentucky. Maybe Gillespie was also too ambitious becase UK did not work out for him al all. Alabama was lost for a while there until they got Coach Saban and look what has happened to their program. Coach Holtz and now Spurrier have totally made the Gamcocks relevant. They were left for dead in the SEC for the longest.
The moral to the story is that who you put in charge really matters. Ask the owner of the Cowboys. If he hadn't meddled, they would have won at least three more with that team and who knows how many they would have had since. One of the WORST ownership moves in the history of the sport.
This post was edited by horn4life1 2 years ago
Hah. I don't live on these boards all the time and just saw this. I enjoy some discussion and I think the one regarding Baylor's recent upswing is a good one. It's just funny that somehow rhetoric about A&M finds its way into a good discussion.
Baylor doing well for a year or two isn't going to effect the state of recruiting in Texas. You guys having 1 really bad year didn't hurt you. This year is going to be key for them. Win 8-10 games and beat texas for the 3rd straight year and some momentum in recruiting will start to build. That will negatively effect A&M for sure.
I agree wholeheartedly with this statement. We screwed the pooch (no pun intended) when we hired Fran. Mack Brown has been fabulous for you and was the right hire after a decade of less than spectacular football.
Unfortunately (well, not unfortunately from my point of view), I think you guys are one hire too late from UH in the same way you were one hire too fast from TCU. And yes, I realize Fran was hired from Bama, but you get my drift. I don't think Sumlin is the same level of coach as Briles. I think the A&M program looks much different now if Briles had been selected over Sherman in '07.
I agree with the second half of that statement. Briles would have been the wise hire in 2007. That quite possibly could have put Griffin in an A&M jersey and not BU.
Regarding Sumlin, it's too early to tell. Personally, I was hoping it was either him, Petersen from BSU (wasn't happening), or Fedora. We need a youth infusion in the coaching ranks.
The circumstances that surrounded the hiring of Fran should have been enough to tell us what we were in for. He was after cash and that was it. Sherman just didn't have it together when it came to relating to players on a consistent basis.
I agree that it's too early to make definitive statements about Sumlin, but I do believe he'll be the next in the series of bought out aggie coaches in 3-4 years. At that point, I envision your new battle cry being the need to find a young, defensive-minded coach that can build an SEC defense. But I guess we'll see.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports