What another fire the e coach and no Astroag jumping on the bandwagon.

Oh and BQ save your *****in for football, it's almost here.

Garrido made more than double what Childress makes. They'll probably save money and improve results by moving Augie and hiring either the Tulane or DBU coach.

When your coach makes 400k or so and is making super regionals, it's easier to push down the priority list than when your coach makes over a million and both misses the tournament and goes under .500 in the watered down version of the Big 12 3 out of 5 seasons.

quote:

---

quote:

---

He ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT do this in the post season which is all that matters

---

The regular season matters if you want to play in the postseason. As mentioned earlier, the SEC played for or won the national championship for 8 straight years before this season. After 2 seasons, Childress has us as contending and winning things in what has been, in recent history, the best conference in college baseball. 6 different SEC teams have played for the national championship in that time span. Our teams have held their own against Florida, Vanderbilt, LSU, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State and those teams have either great head coaches or have been in Omaha in very recent years. The way we've been able to transition to competing at that level in the SEC is not a "so what" accomplishment.

---

My point is solely directed at the post season. Any criticism of RC's regular season work is pretty ridiculous, whether talking about his work in the b12 or SEC. The regular season exists to get into the post season and put yourself in a position to be playing at home.

quote:

---

quote:

---

He has been owned by Graham and Garrido in the past

---

And our program is in better shape than either of those schools now. Garrido was sent away for being ineffective for 4 of 5 straight seasons and our record against Rice has been favorable recently. Nobody would be making choices about firing a coach based on our record against Rice in 2007 and 2008 or a team we haven't even played regularly for 4 seasons now. Also factual.

---

He's passed Graham and Garrido but he's also been passed by Schlossnagle and Tadlock at two other in state programs. Also factual.

Schlossnagle, undoubtedly.

I wouldn't trade him for Tadlock, personally.

But I never claimed he was the best coach in the country. He's a good coach, and one that does a better job than most people here would give him credit for. That's why he isn't getting fired, because he hasn't done anything to deserve it right now.

It's more fun arguing with morons like you

quote:

---

Schlossnagle, undoubtedly.

I wouldn't trade him for Tadlock, personally.

---

The point isn't whether or not we'd trade for them. The point is their programs have passed ours based on post season results.

quote:

---

But I never claimed he was the best coach in the country. He's a good coach, and one that does a better job than most people here would give him credit for. That's why he isn't getting fired, because he hasn't done anything to deserve it right now.

---

It just depends on your set of values and how your prioritize them. My first two are do you get to Omaha and do you win there and everything else is secondary.

I guess it just depends what A&Ms expectations are. If top 20 is it, RC is the guy as he seems to be a Super Regional magnet. If top 10 is, then maybe 1 top 10 finish in a decade is not so good.

quote:

---

It just depends on your set of values and how your prioritize them. My first two are do you get to Omaha and do you win there and everything else is secondary.

---

Except that it doesn't depend on your "values" and how you prioritize them. My goals for the baseball team are irrelevant as some random dude that attends some games and buys some drinks. I posted a handful of times in this thread, what matters is what the AD thinks and how he's willing and able to run his athletic department.

And I'm willing to assume the current athletic director isn't preparing to hand Childress a pink slip, because the results of the most recent seasons wouldn't get him fired anywhere. 99 wins, SEC Tournament winner, one game short of Omaha two straight years isn't a firing offense anywhere except potentially LSU. I mentioned earlier that the strictest set of "values" I've seen were the old Florida AD, and he fired people after mediocre regular seasons and failing to get out of a regional 2 straight years. That's not the current situation.

It isn't because I "accept mediocrity" or don't bag on the coach enough on the internet. It's because by the metrics just about every AD uses for a non-revenue sport, Childress didn't do a bad job and isn't about to get fired. Saying you expect great things on an internet forum has never affected anything. I'm willing to make the "big jump" here and state that whereas my values used to be that I like watching baseball, they are now that I EXPECT that we play for and win championships or the coach isn't getting it done. Now that I'm on your side, we'll see if the tide turns in the AD's office.

If your goal is winning a national championship, and you think Childress is incapable of doing that, I don't see how it can mean that you aren't in favor of him being fired.

as an aside...don't underestimate the impact of social media on athletic departments. Its influence will only continue to grow as time goes by.

and of course there have been many, many examples of that on texags thru the years

quote:

---

So O'Sullivan should fired since they were ranked number one for a good part of the season- and don't forget Miami was ranked number one for a while.

Fire em all!

---

The difference is that these two teams at least made Omaha!

I absolutely underestimate it, or we literally wouldn't have any of the major men's sports coaches we currently have. A decade plus of reading those posts have led to 0 coaching changes at the time social media decided they were necessary, and in all cases not for years and years after the complaints started.

Also, that list of goals would have gotten every coach in the SEC fired except maybe O'Sullivan. It's one thing to have a good list of goals, it's another to say they're "reasonable" inferring that it's just that easy to be that good of a program.

It's neat to posture on the internet about how strict your expectations are for collegiate athletics, but the only evidence we have on Woodward is his total willingness to go public about extending a contract to Kennedy before he even saw his postseason performance. That doesn't shout that he's about to go drop the hammer on everyone to me, but I could be wrong. It more looks like the overly generous and sometimes puzzling approach to contracts we've seen from the AD for years.

Thousands upon thousands of people have "demanded excellence" since I started reading Texags. In football, it got us an unnecessary extension to Fran and a couple of hires based on who the donors knew and thought "got Texas A&M". In basketball, it got us one miracle hire and an extension (by Woodward) to a basketball coach that made one tournament out of 5 seasons and beat 2 double digit seeds before getting dismantled by their first single-seed opponent. In baseball, Childress got an extension in 2013 after the team made it into the postseason by the safety of probably a single game.

Florida averaged 1,200 less people per game than us in baseball last season despite how good they are on a yearly basis, but that AD had a pretty clear barometer for major sports despite the unimpressive attendance numbers....2 bad years in a row and you'll get fired. I'm ok with a director being allowed to do his job, and when I'd noticed that the last time we had this discussion in 2013, it was easy to know when Muschamp would be fired (and he was).

So I don't see anything in the above posts other than venting on the internet. The same posts have been made since at least 2004, and it's gotten us donor meddling in football hires and a general disregard for the basketball program despite its status us the only other major men's revenue sport (how do you demand excellence in basketball when no one at your school watched or attended the games in the first place). If Woodward is about to change all that, I'll just have to believe it when I see it. Considering Sumlin's contract is through 2019 and basically guaranteed, the "excellence culture" has pretty much guaranteed us anything short of total disaster in football means there isn't about to be a change there either.

Edit--I forgot the excellence culture's hiring of Hyman and paying him 7 figures a year. That's not exactly ancient history either.

Double Edit--And speaking of "searches" for hires, Woodward came in briefly following the hiring of President Young from Washington. I'm sure there was an extensive search for the best candidate there as well.

Frangate

quote:

---

It may be the case now that hiring a top notch coach is very difficult, however, the coaches you list above were never even offered the A&M job back in 2005. A few of them (Tanner, Hall) were token interviews by Byrne to carry out a dog-and-pony show as cover to hire his buddy Childress from Nebraska. He had actually pegged him for the job months before he actually fired MJ. George Horton openly lobbied for the job in the media in California and Byrne never even picked up the phone (Horton tried to reach him several times) to discuss the job with him and he was only the top coach in the country at the time. I'll never forgive Byrne for that fiasco.

As far as our situation with Childress now, without going over a full rehash of all the arguments over the last few weeks again, everyone understands that he is not going to be fired after back to back SR appearances. What I do believe has happened though is that Woodward is going to do a full review of the program over the next year and determine what needs to happen to get over the hump. I've stated repeatedly that Childress needs to hire a full time sports psychologist for the mental aspects of the game, especially for the postseason. TCU clearly had the mental edge the last two years.

For several years now I've stated what the goals for the A&M program should be:

• Regional appearance every year
• Host a Regional 4 out of every 5 years
• Advance to Super Regional 3 out of every 5 years
• Advance to CWS 1 out of every 3 years (2 out of 5 years based on winning 2 of the 3 SR appearances every 5 years)
• Advance to national championship series 1 out of every 12 years (which is 1 out of every 4 CWS appearances)

These are very reasonable numbers for a program with A&M's built-in advantages, resources, and SEC brand. We've seen several local schools on this pace over the last 5 years alone, with top SEC rivals (LSU, Florida, Vanderbilt) on an even better pace. I think if Childress hasn't made the CWS by 2018 there is a decent chance he will be replaced, or at least Woodward would consider a change at that point. The excuses for A&M coaches for not winning in the postseason (which is all that matters anyway) is not going to be acceptable in the near future as the fan base continues its transformation into a demanding excellence culture.

---

No real issue with what you said at all. I would reiterate my only point - it can be extremely tough getting an establish top-tier coach to go anywhere. That doesnt mean change cant be made - it does mean everyone should go into it with very open eyes. I believe there is a small subset (isnt there always?) that think we can do whatever we want, when we want. Those are the ones everyone needs to be wary of.

Byrne is gone - thank God. I know what his words were, but Im less convinced he was fully truthful afterwards. Either he had interest in the people he talked to and failed to follow through for various reasons (mainly, because he wasnt going to get an agreement) or he literally brought in a parade of candidates who were knowingly perceived to be of a higher stature than his true target. If he truly did that on purpose, the colossal f-up on his part was the stupidest thing he's done in his professional career. Which may be. Or may only be partially true.

I think its spectacular that you've laid out expectations in full. Way too many of these conversations are had with mere suggestions and then both sides argue out points that have only been inferred or never even brought up in the first place. The real proof of your expectations is how they apply to coaching population at large. They seem reasonable. That FL, LSU, and Vandy seem to follow suit is a good start. But, honestly, I want to understand the entire population. If I get time, I'll try and pull it together. If anyone else has it, I'd love to see it.

quote:

---

For several years now I've stated what the goals for the A&M program should be:

• Regional appearance every year
• Host a Regional 4 out of every 5 years
• Advance to Super Regional 3 out of every 5 years
• Advance to CWS 1 out of every 3 years (2 out of 5 years based on winning 2 of the 3 SR appearances every 5 years)

.

---

Let's start with number 1 on your list. How many coaches have made regionals the last 10 years?

My guess is 99% of coaches are getting fired just because they can't complete #1 on your list.

Now of the few coaches who have made a regional each of the last 10 years, how many hosted their regional 8 times in the past 10 years?

By the time we have completed the first 2 on your list I doubt we have even 1 coach who you wouldn't have fired.

But if there is one coach who completed steps 1 and 2 on your list, please tell me who it is and if they went to 6 supers in the last 10 years (step 3).

In short sir, I think your list is ridiculously unreasonable if there aren't 10 coaches who can complete all steps.

Clemson's Jack Leggett was fired in 2015 after make a regional in 20 of 21 years. Including his last 7 seasons. He even went to Omaha 6 times with the Tigers -- most recently in 2010. But the program became stuck in the regional round his last 5 years and he was let go.

by the way...Clemson did not fall off a cliff falling his departure. This season the Tigers got a national seed, hosted a regional, won the ACC tournament, and won the series vs. SCar. Not bad for the new head coach in year #1.

Childress hasn't been stuck in a regional for 5 straight years. They also lost their hosted regional to a Big 12 team. I'll let you guess how the new hire would have been received here for achieving the same results.

quote:

---

Clemson's Jack Leggett was fired in 2015 after make a regional in 20 of 21 years. Including his last 7 seasons. He even went to Omaha 6 times with the Tigers -- most recently in 2010. But the program became stuck in the regional round his last 5 years and he was let go.

by the way...Clemson did not fall off a cliff falling his departure. This season the Tigers got a national seed, hosted a regional, won the ACC tournament, and won the series vs. SCar. Not bad for the new head coach in year #1.

---

But that is the same level as the previous coach since regular season and conference tourney results dont matter to many of the posters

So many could argue same ole same ole

quote:

---

quote:

---

Clemson's Jack Leggett was fired in 2015 after make a regional in 20 of 21 years. Including his last 7 seasons. He even went to Omaha 6 times with the Tigers -- most recently in 2010. But the program became stuck in the regional round his last 5 years and he was let go.

by the way...Clemson did not fall off a cliff falling his departure. This season the Tigers got a national seed, hosted a regional, won the ACC tournament, and won the series vs. SCar. Not bad for the new head coach in year #1.

---

But that is the same level as the previous coach since regular season and conference tourney results dont matter to many of the posters

So many could argue same ole same ole

---

So if the new coach doesn't beat the old coach's results in year 1, then it was a mistake to fire the old coach?

That's stupid.

Almost any coach can have us in the post season every year. I place next to zero value on that. I'd be perfectly fine with missing the post season a couple times if the same coach had taken us to Omaha a couple times. Dave Van Horn missed the post season this season. Doesn't matter. Why? Because he regularly has his team in Omaha.

And good luck getting someone fired that just had seasons like the past 2 regardless of what happened in 2009. They were good, even if you think they weren't good enough. Higher attendance, more wins, more players going pro, tournament win. That doesn't show a faltering program headed by an incapable coach who's about to get fired.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Clemson's Jack Leggett was fired in 2015 after make a regional in 20 of 21 years. Including his last 7 seasons. He even went to Omaha 6 times with the Tigers -- most recently in 2010. But the program became stuck in the regional round his last 5 years and he was let go.

by the way...Clemson did not fall off a cliff falling his departure. This season the Tigers got a national seed, hosted a regional, won the ACC tournament, and won the series vs. SCar. Not bad for the new head coach in year #1.

---

But that is the same level as the previous coach since regular season and conference tourney results dont matter to many of the posters

So many could argue same ole same ole

---

So if the new coach doesn't beat the old coach's results in year 1, then it was a mistake to fire the old coach?

That's stupid.

Almost any coach can have us in the post season every year. I place next to zero value on that. I'd be perfectly fine with missing the post season a couple times if the same coach had taken us to Omaha a couple times. Dave Van Horn missed the post season this season. Doesn't matter. Why? Because he regularly has his team in Omaha.

---

My point was simply you fired a coach and replaced him with another coach who got the same results. Nothing more than that. The person i quoted gave all these things the first year coach did but none of that matters to our fan base asking for Childress' head. They dont care at all about those accomplishments since it doesnt serve the agenda they are preaching.

My point has been and always will be we are put in a position to get to Omaha every year while having some of the best regular seasons that a college program can have and people are calling for a change when we are the number one team in the nation going into a tourney in which two games can end a season...of which we didnt let an earned run score in the final game

quote:

---

Clemson's Jack Leggett was fired in 2015 after make a regional in 20 of 21 years. Including his last 7 seasons. He even went to Omaha 6 times with the Tigers -- most recently in 2010. But the program became stuck in the regional round his last 5 years and he was let go.

by the way...Clemson did not fall off a cliff falling his departure. This season the Tigers got a national seed, hosted a regional, won the ACC tournament, and won the series vs. SCar. Not bad for the new head coach in year #1.

---

A&M would fire RC too if after 20+ years he failed to make a super in 5 straight years. That's the definition of stale. Was your Clemson example meant as some sort of roadmap? Seems like you're trying too hard.

Do you have a more relevant comparison?

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Clemson's Jack Leggett was fired in 2015 after make a regional in 20 of 21 years. Including his last 7 seasons. He even went to Omaha 6 times with the Tigers -- most recently in 2010. But the program became stuck in the regional round his last 5 years and he was let go.

by the way...Clemson did not fall off a cliff falling his departure. This season the Tigers got a national seed, hosted a regional, won the ACC tournament, and won the series vs. SCar. Not bad for the new head coach in year #1.

---

But that is the same level as the previous coach since regular season and conference tourney results dont matter to many of the posters

So many could argue same ole same ole

---

So if the new coach doesn't beat the old coach's results in year 1, then it was a mistake to fire the old coach?

That's stupid.

Almost any coach can have us in the post season every year. I place next to zero value on that. I'd be perfectly fine with missing the post season a couple times if the same coach had taken us to Omaha a couple times. Dave Van Horn missed the post season this season. Doesn't matter. Why? Because he regularly has his team in Omaha.

---

My point was simply you fired a coach and replaced him with another coach who got the same results. Nothing more than that. The person i quoted gave all these things the first year coach did but none of that matters to our fan base asking for Childress' head. They dont care at all about those accomplishments since it doesnt serve the agenda they are preaching.

My point has been and always will be we are put in a position to get to Omaha every year while having some of the best regular seasons that a college program can have and people are calling for a change when we are the number one team in the nation going into a tourney in which two games can end a season...of which we didnt let an earned run score in the final game

---

We didn't score an earned run either. What difference does it make how we lost?

1-6 vs TX teams in the post season is a trend that isn't going to change in my opinion. It is what it is. Even if we have a break through year and get to Omaha by beating TCU or TT or whoever, that's just one season. The trend suggests we'll lose to TX teams way more times than not in the post season. Considering we are going to typically be matched up with them, our chances of making Omaha regularly are very slim under RC.

quote:

---

We didn't score an earned run either. What difference does it make how we lost?

---

Perhaps he is pointing out how creative RC's teams are in finding ways to lose.

quote:

---

And good luck getting someone fired that just had seasons like the past 2 regardless of what happened in 2009. They were good, even if you think they weren't good enough. Higher attendance, more wins, more players going pro, tournament win. That doesn't show a faltering program headed by an incapable coach who's about to get fired.

---

Those things just don't matter to me at all if we aren't going to Omaha. Nobody said our program is faltering. It just has an established ceiling under this coach.

Ok Rocco same question Hidden Ag couldnt answer...who you gonna get to replace ??

I'm curious why people think a 47 year old baseball coach already has an established ceiling. Is that when you plan to stop getting better at your job?

quote:

---

And good luck getting someone fired that just had seasons like the past 2 regardless of what happened in 2009. They were good, even if you think they weren't good enough. Higher attendance, more wins, more players going pro, tournament win. That doesn't show a faltering program headed by an incapable coach who's about to get fired.

---

No doubt the record the past two seasons buys him more time. More players going pro can certainly help recruiting, but it also points out his continuing trend of failure to take seriously talented teams to the CWS.

If Sumlin won the SEC once, and we lost in the first round of the playoffs that year, would that be satisfactory after he was here 11 years?

If one CWS appearance every 11 years, and one trip to the football playoffs every 11 years is satisfactory, then that falls below the "accepting mediocrity" level.

quote:

---

quote:

---

And good luck getting someone fired that just had seasons like the past 2 regardless of what happened in 2009. They were good, even if you think they weren't good enough. Higher attendance, more wins, more players going pro, tournament win. That doesn't show a faltering program headed by an incapable coach who's about to get fired.

---

Those things just don't matter to me at all if we aren't going to Omaha. Nobody said our program is faltering. It just has an established ceiling under this coach.

---

Rocco is the expert at determining what is a credible sample in a sport and format notorious for random outcomes. He's a wizard.

You can point to RC's established positives, in a regional every year, hosting almost half the time, in supers almost half the time, clean program, good attendance, pro draft, etc.

And by the same token, on its flip side, you can point to the established negatives. Doesn't get to Omaha let alone win there, isn't competing for NCs, can't get by TX teams who we are always going to be paired with in the post season.

Considering all of that, I don't see how anyone can fault anyone else for wanting to see RC fired or retained. There's plenty of evidence in either side to suggest either. If your priorities are being in the post season every year, clean, stable program, getting players drafted, then you should absolutely want to retain him. If your priorities are getting to Omaha, winning there, and competing for NCs, then you have valid reason to want to see him replaced.

My priorities are obviously the latter, but I put enough value on the former to think he deserves to stay.

However, the very first time he misses the post season, then I'd like to see him replaced.

As to who I'd replace him with, to me, what he's done here is hardly irreplaceable. As I said, I'm all about Omaha. He's got no wins there. Any coach could come here and have no wins in Omaha after 11 seasons. I think a lot of competent coaches could better that mark.