Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Samuel S" data-source="post: 129446189" data-attributes="member: 1754664">Briles took over a very weak program in terms of its immediate past and historically. He took over in 2008.&nbsp; From 1996-2007, Baylor&nbsp; was 35-101.&nbsp; In the 4 seasons before him it went 15-31.There was zero dropoff from the start (not that there was far to fall) and even including his first two rebuilding seasons he went 25-25 to start.&nbsp; Years 3-5, he went 25-14.Obviously, Briles does not fit into &quot;showed no improvement over the first 5 and got a 6th season category of coaches. That some clueless poster threw his name blindly into the discussion just shows how utterly desperate people are.Cutcliffe at Duke (is that whom we want to compare our program now, btw?) went only 21-40 his first 5 seasons but not only did they have the best year in that 5th, meaning they improved during that portion of his tenure---- Duke had gone 7-39 in the 4 seasons prior to him being hired. He won more games during his 1st 2 seasons than Duke had won the prior 4.Obviously, again,&nbsp; Cutcliffe is far outside the profile of a coach who failed to register improvement over 5 seasons and then got a 6th.&nbsp; So, I need you to do some homework for me, professor. Show me ONE person other than Beamer who fits the profile into which Dana fits and got a 6th season!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Samuel S, post: 129446189, member: 1754664"] Briles took over a very weak program in terms of its immediate past and historically. He took over in 2008. From 1996-2007, Baylor was 35-101. In the 4 seasons before him it went 15-31. There was zero dropoff from the start (not that there was far to fall) and even including his first two rebuilding seasons he went 25-25 to start. Years 3-5, he went 25-14. Obviously, Briles does not fit into "showed no improvement over the first 5 and got a 6th season category of coaches. That some clueless poster threw his name blindly into the discussion just shows how utterly desperate people are. Cutcliffe at Duke (is that whom we want to compare our program now, btw?) went only 21-40 his first 5 seasons but not only did they have the best year in that 5th, meaning they improved during that portion of his tenure---- Duke had gone 7-39 in the 4 seasons prior to him being hired. He won more games during his 1st 2 seasons than Duke had won the prior 4. Obviously, again, Cutcliffe is far outside the profile of a coach who failed to register improvement over 5 seasons and then got a 6th. So, I need you to do some homework for me, professor. Show me ONE person other than Beamer who fits the profile into which Dana fits and got a 6th season! [/QUOTE]

Name