Just trying to get some thoughts out there. The have become the laughingstock of the confrence since their inception in 1996 to the super confrence Big 12. So are they good in the fact that they help keep a good balance in the confrence, or do they drag the Big 12 down?
ESPN is reporting that they're considering hiring Mike Singletary. didn't Baylor learn from UH's mistake with Clyde the Glyde???
Apparently not. Singletary hasnt coached a day in his life. Looks like they may be using him as recruiting bait or something perhaps.
In Baylor's last 7 games they were outscored 334 - 58. They were shutout 3 times and they lost by more than 30 points in all 7 games. That is just downright embarrassing.
yup. if A&M gets Francione and Baylor gets Singletary, the recruiting wars in the Big XII South are going to get mighty tough.
Singletary will be succesful, if he hires the right coaches below him. Singlettary doesn't need to be a hands-on coach, that is what assistants are for. I always felt like head coaches were figure-head for a football program. I think this is a good move for Baylor. Do they really have anything to lose? They can't be worse than they are right now.
I read some article in which the writer said Baylor would be better off hiring a minority instead of another white guy to overcome Baylor's upperclass image.
Does BU have an upperclass image? I never thought about that. I think hiring a qualified African-American coach would be great for recruiting.
I think he's looking at it from the perspective of an urban athlete. Baylor not only has to recruit to compete in the Big 12, it also recruits against the other private schools in Texas. A minority head coach would give them a huge boost. Whether Baylor is or is not a preppy private school, the stereotype exists.
I am still amazed that Baylor made it in the Big 12 instead of Houston. U of H is a much bigger school, and at the time in 95 they were alot better program, not to mention some of the history that UH has that Baylor doesnt. Ann Richards is the reason for that though. I just dont see Baylor having success in football anytime soon. None of the good schools in the Big 12 takes the Baylor game seriously. Although if your going to say Baylor doesnt belong, Kansas definitley doesnt either.
Those of us whose schools ended up in the WAC or C-USA have always wondered how long it would take before Baylor would be back with the rest of us...
Do you know why Rice didn't join C-USA? Interesting that TCU jumped from the WAC to C-USA last year. It's definitely a better football conference.
At the time, the WAC looked like a better deal than the brand new C-USA. That was, of course, before the Mountain West teams defected and the idea of the WAC becomming a SuperConference didn't seem so far-fetched. Personally, I'd love to see Baylor get replaced by Arkansas in the Big 12. I miss having Arkansas in the same conference as Texas, etc. The chances of that happening, though, are essentially zero as Arkansas seems plenty happy in the SEC.
How can schools like Baylor and Kansas be so good in other sports (baseball and basketball respectively), but be so crappy at everything else? If they can do it in one sport, surely they can do it at other sports with the right personel.
I've seen it bantered around on texags and hornfans that it came down to Baylor or TCU when the conference was formed, and Richards wanted Baylor because of her connections to the school, even though TCU seemed to be a better choice....anybody know if there's truth to that?
do you honestly believe UH would have been more successful than baylor??? UH went without winning one game in the freaking WAC or in the out of conference schedule last year. i can't see how UH would be appreciably better than baylor in the big XII.
why was tcu a better choice?? keep in mind that in 1991, baylor was ranked as high as 4th in the nation after beating colorado at colorado the third or fourth game of the season...the big XII was put together about 3 years later.
