BoozingAg said:

---

twk said:

---

TAL06RES said:

---

BoozingAg said:

---

Ok, so if that's true, so are one of the following:

1. He's turning down what's likely a long term contract from Nebraska to continue to coach here with only 2 seasons left on his contract, which means he's coaching in 2020 with one year left.

2. We gave him an extension despite Woodward would've not only not given him one but likely fired him if he hadn't left for LSU.

---

That's a lot of speculation.

The reality is, if you're in RC's position, with 2 years remaining on your contract, why would you walk away from an assured $2MM? And, why would you walk away from a job you love? People can talk all the **** they want about RC and his coaching ability, but it's pretty clear that he loves A&M and coaching here.

We don't know that Nebraska offered him anything.

And to number 2... pure conjecture. There's no reason to give him an extension this year. He has 2 years remaining, not one.

---

Agree. He's assuming things that are probably incorrect. Even if Nebraska was willing to match Rob's salary, his budge for assistant coaches would have been less than at A&M (perhaps a lot less). Only a defeatist who thought there was no way he could win next year (with what looks to be another great pitching staff, but a black hole of an offense that needs revamping) would pass up on that kind of money, and that kind of opportunity. Rob is a competitor, and he believes he can get it fixed.

I see no reason why we would do an extension now. Bjork says he wants time to evaluate every program. It doesn't make sense that he would do an extension that limits his options before doing that evaluation.

So, the only remaining questions are: (1) whether there are any peronnel changes amongst the other staff; and, (2) what kind of personnel changes do we see on the roster.

---

It's not at all speculation or assumption.

Fact: RC has 2 seasons left on his contract.

Fact: It has been reported that Nebraska contacted RC.

What you call a defeatist I call a realist. Anyone thinking we are going to have some massive turnaround next year offensively, or that our pitching staff is going to somehow be better with who we are losing, is ignoring a lot of past data to the contrary. We don't know that we are going to have any new assistant coaches either, in all likelihood we will not.

I could see us giving RC one more year, which would essentially be giving him just enough rope to hang himself with, as if we haven't already, for the sake of lowering the buyout.

I wonder what the terms are of RC's buyout. If he is hired by another school, do we owe him the full buyout? If so, I could see him trying to wait us out, trying to be fired, collect his buyout, and then take the Nebraska gig.

---

Contacted is not the equivalent of offering a contract, which not only did you imply, you also implied it's a long term deal, neither of which we know. The ASSUMPTION was that RC could possibly be persuaded by Nebraska for comparable money AND a long term deal, but we don't know that either. So given what's happened, and what's been publicly stated, it's safe to go with what RC has said... he likes his job, he wants to be here, and he's not interested in moving on.

In the case of buyouts... if he's hired away by another school we don't owe him anything. I doubt we have a clause in which he owes us in that scenario, but I don't know that either.

You can call yourself whatever you want, but as for next year, I think it's totally understandable to be skeptical. However, we are talking about baseball, so a massive offensive turnaround from this year to next only takes a couple guys hitting .030 points higher than they did this year and some newcomers hitting around .280 with a handful of HR's and this ball club is completely different.

For the pitching... data points are there that this will continue to be a strength. We lose Dox and Kalich. Honestly, I liked Kalich, but he was shaky at best as a closer. Dox will be the real loss, and I think with Lacy, Roa, and Weber, we will be more than fine in that department. Being an RC doubter is fine, but it's really hard to doubt what he's done consistently with our pitching year in and year out.

twk said:

---

Quote:

---

What you call a defeatist I call a realist. Anyone thinking we are going to have some massive turnaround next year offensively, or that our pitching staff is going to somehow be better with who we are losing, is ignoring a lot of past data to the contrary. We don't know that we are going to have any new assistant coaches either, in all likelihood we will not.

---

Go back and re-read my post to make sure you didn't misunderstand. I'm not calling you a defeatist, I'm saying that for a coach in Rob's position to think that he can't take a stellar pitching staff, and turn around the worst offense any of us have ever seen to at least a competitive level would be a defeatist. In other words, any coach with any intestinal fortitude (and $2 million owed to him on his current contract) would stick it out expecting, not just hoping, to turn it around. It may or may not happen, but any coach worth having would feel that way.

---

Notice the lack of Ag tag and 12th man tag on the Ag who references finances and our school.

aginlakeway said:

---

twk said:

---

Quote:

---

What you call a defeatist I call a realist. Anyone thinking we are going to have some massive turnaround next year offensively, or that our pitching staff is going to somehow be better with who we are losing, is ignoring a lot of past data to the contrary. We don't know that we are going to have any new assistant coaches either, in all likelihood we will not.

---

Go back and re-read my post to make sure you didn't misunderstand. I'm not calling you a defeatist, I'm saying that for a coach in Rob's position to think that he can't take a stellar pitching staff, and turn around the worst offense any of us have ever seen to at least a competitive level would be a defeatist. In other words, any coach with any intestinal fortitude (and $2 million owed to him on his current contract) would stick it out expecting, not just hoping, to turn it around. It may or may not happen, but any coach worth having would feel that way.

---

Notice the lack of Ag tag and 12th man tag on the Ag who references finances and our school.

---

I don't have an Ag tag or 12th Man tag on my profile, but I assure you I am both... not sure this means a whole lot.

Lately our biggest jump in hitting is transfers coming into the program. Not being developed. Those who were high school recruits have slid backward in offensive numbers especially OBP and BA
Power numbers have dropped steadily across the board and stolen bases as well. So what is our offensive identity. If RC isn't in charge of that In any way then maybe he has to be or get someone else and have them be accountable

twk said:

---

Not a boomer. Try again. I don't think it's generational. I've run into plenty of old Ags who repeat the same nonsense that you type. Hell, they were typing it 20 years ago on this site.

---

Ok. Fair.

Quote:

---

They were still typing after we fired Slocum, Fran, Sherman, and Sumlin. They will still be typing it in the future because its a convenient scapegoat argument.

---

Is it? Does a competent AD keep RC around that long? Does a competent AD even hire Sherman?

chester said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

chester said:

---

BoozingAg said:

---

Wicked Good Ag said:

---

PPlz After the money was spent on football track and softball upgrades along with new tax implications the money is not near as available as most people think

And if people talk about all the SEC money remember all the schools in the #1 baseball conference get the same money


Another point that the anti RC group fails to note is that we were a top 16 RPI team at the time of seeds being handed out DURING the worst hitting performance in decades and while that isn't enough to most people it also shows for AT LEAST this season that it was above average job getting that many wins under those conditions. Now those conditions exist during his head coaching tenure is another discussion altogether

---

He's responsible for it all. Not just the pitching. The last sentence is not another discussion, THAT is THE discussion.

---

He's also responsible for a school record 13 consecutive NCAA Tournament appearances!

---

Big deal

Making a Regional is nothing

---

You cannot get to Omaha unless you get to a Regional. Maybe you didn't know that.

---

Everybody knows that. Using it as some type of blue star is silly though.

And let's face the absolute facts - we've made regionals. As stated, 13 years in a row. Great stat, not taking away from the fact that for 13 years we've been one of the top 21% of teams in the country.

But let's use your logic here - in order to get to Omaha, you have to make it out of regionals and Supers. In 13 years, we've eeked that out twice. .153%. Making a regional is great if your goal is to make a regional. Doesn't help to not get out of them if your goal is to win a championship though, which is the entire argument of the time for a change crowd.

RC is going to coach next season, I have no doubt about that. And I have no doubt we'll make a record 14th regional. I have every doubt we'll do anything beyond that.

schmellba99 said:

---

chester said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

chester said:

---

BoozingAg said:

---

Wicked Good Ag said:

---

MPPlz After the money was spent on football track and softball upgrades along with new tax implications the money is not near as available as most people think

And if people talk about all the SEC money remember all the schools in the #1 baseball conference get the same money


Another point that the anti RC group fails to note is that we were a top 16 RPI team at the time of seeds being handed out DURING the worst hitting performance in decades and while that isn't enough to most people it also shows for AT LEAST this season that it was above average job getting that many wins under those conditions. Now those conditions exist during his head coaching tenure is another discussion altogether

---

He's responsible for it all. Not just the pitching. The last sentence is not another discussion, THAT is THE discussion.

---

He's also responsible for a school record 13 consecutive NCAA Tournament appearances!

---

Big deal

Making a Regional is nothing

---

You cannot get to Omaha unless you get to a Regional. Maybe you didn't know that.

---

Everybody knows that. Using it as some type of blue star is silly though.

And let's face the absolute facts - we've made regionals. As stated, 13 years in a row. Great stat, not taking away from the fact that for 13 years we've been one of the top 21% of teams in the country.

But let's use your logic here - in order to get to Omaha, you have to make it out of regionals and Supers. In 13 years, we've eeked that out twice. .153%. Making a regional is great if your goal is to make a regional. Doesn't help to not get out of them if your goal is to win a championship though, which is the entire argument of the time for a change crowd.

RC is going to coach next season, I have no doubt about that. And I have no doubt we'll make a record 14th regional. I have every doubt we'll do anything beyond that.

---

Only thing true about the last paragraph is that RC is going to coach.

twk said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

twk said:

---

Quote:

---

What you call a defeatist I call a realist. Anyone thinking we are going to have some massive turnaround next year offensively, or that our pitching staff is going to somehow be better with who we are losing, is ignoring a lot of past data to the contrary. We don't know that we are going to have any new assistant coaches either, in all likelihood we will not.

---

Go back and re-read my post to make sure you didn't misunderstand. I'm not calling you a defeatist, I'm saying that for a coach in Rob's position to think that he can't take a stellar pitching staff, and turn around the worst offense any of us have ever seen to at least a competitive level would be a defeatist. In other words, any coach with any intestinal fortitude (and $2 million owed to him on his current contract) would stick it out expecting, not just hoping, to turn it around. It may or may not happen, but any coach worth having would feel that way.

---

Who cares how Rob feels?

Do you think he's getting the job one or not?

Do you think Rob's performance as head coach is good enough to warrant keeping him around?

I don't

---

The point of that reply was that it's hard to have a conversation/discussion with someone if they misunderstand what you are saying--or make a post which is not responsive.

As to your questions, with a $2 million buyout, 2 years left on the contract, and not starting until July 8, it's a bit of a reach to think that Bjork is going to make a change. I was extremely disappointed with what we saw this year because, for the first time since Wacha and Stripling, we had the arms to go out on Friday nights and expect (not just hope) to win. I figured mediocre production at the plate would be enough to have a really good season. I didn't expect to see what we saw at the plate. If I was the AD, given the contract and athletic department recent state of affairs, I'd probably tell Rob he's not getting an extension this year, even if that hurts recruiting, and that we will pay the buyout next year if we don't see results.

If we could make a change without paying $2 million, and had a top quality replacement waiting in the wings, I'd pull the trigger, because it has been 14 years, and making a change now would give the new guy a chance to start with a great pitching staff, and just needing to find about 3 good bats to have a really good first year. But, for a program with a $4 million budget, and an AD that just paid millions to buyout Kennedy and Sumlin, I couldn't do it.

---

Ok that's fair, And I agree

I do think that Texas A&M, and idiotic decisions by administrators, and/or Generous boosters that dermdoc idolizes Got us in a position to where we can't really do anything. The Sumlin and Kennedy contracts were Two of the most idiotic decisions I've ever seen with regard to a head coach's terms and compensation.

It just goes to show you that the people with millions can make idiotic decisions just like anyone else. The problem is, they have the money to implement their stupidity. LOL.

Anyway, I agree with you. With the athletic director change, and budget constraints, Childress is going nowhere. Even though it was Texas A&M that shot it's self in the foot to begin with

One other thing. You and I are probably the two biggest believers in the notion that a coach is normally not going to coach without a decent amount of time on his contract.

It looks like An exception is going to be made this year. I think it's refreshing

Quote:

---

One other thing. You and I are probably the two biggest believers in the notion that a coach is normally not going to coach without a decent amount of time on his contract.

It looks like An exception is going to be made this year. I think it's refreshing

---

It is out of the ordinary, but it's an unusual circumstance. Rob can tell recruits that he doesn't have an extension because there is a new AD, so he can probably talk his way around it a bit. He's also in a situation where he needs short term help for next year, maybe the year beyond, and that's all covered by his current contract. I think it could have some negative impact on next year's class, but it's time to fish or cut bait.

chester said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

chester said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

chester said:

---

BoozingAg said:

---

Wicked Good Ag said:

---

MPPlz After the money was spent on football track and softball upgrades along with new tax implications the money is not near as available as most people think

And if people talk about all the SEC money remember all the schools in the #1 baseball conference get the same money


Another point that the anti RC group fails to note is that we were a top 16 RPI team at the time of seeds being handed out DURING the worst hitting performance in decades and while that isn't enough to most people it also shows for AT LEAST this season that it was above average job getting that many wins under those conditions. Now those conditions exist during his head coaching tenure is another discussion altogether

---

He's responsible for it all. Not just the pitching. The last sentence is not another discussion, THAT is THE discussion.

---

He's also responsible for a school record 13 consecutive NCAA Tournament appearances!

---

Big deal

Making a Regional is nothing

---

You cannot get to Omaha unless you get to a Regional. Maybe you didn't know that.

---

Everybody knows that. Using it as some type of blue star is silly though.

And let's face the absolute facts - we've made regionals. As stated, 13 years in a row. Great stat, not taking away from the fact that for 13 years we've been one of the top 21% of teams in the country.

But let's use your logic here - in order to get to Omaha, you have to make it out of regionals and Supers. In 13 years, we've eeked that out twice. .153%. Making a regional is great if your goal is to make a regional. Doesn't help to not get out of them if your goal is to win a championship though, which is the entire argument of the time for a change crowd.

RC is going to coach next season, I have no doubt about that. And I have no doubt we'll make a record 14th regional. I have every doubt we'll do anything beyond that.

---

Only thing true about the last paragraph is that RC is going to coach.

---

Historical data suggests otherwise.

twk said:

---

Maybe a bit of a sidenote, but Phil Knight's Oregon's search for a head coach ends with....




...Purdue Head Coach, and former Oregon assistant, Mark Wasikowski (87-82 overall record and 36-34 mark in the Big Ten). Guess they couldn't talk Pat Casey into taking the deal.

---

LOL. They should have gone after Childress.

schmellba99 said:

---

Everybody knows that. Using it as some type of blue star is silly though.

And let's face the absolute facts - we've made regionals. As stated, 13 years in a row. Great stat, not taking away from the fact that for 13 years we've been one of the top 21% of teams in the country.

But let's use your logic here - in order to get to Omaha, you have to make it out of regionals and Supers. In 13 years, we've eeked that out twice. .153%. Making a regional is great if your goal is to make a regional. Doesn't help to not get out of them if your goal is to win a championship though, which is the entire argument of the time for a change crowd.

RC is going to coach next season, I have no doubt about that. And I have no doubt we'll make a record 14th regional. I have every doubt we'll do anything beyond that.

---

Out of those 13 seasons, we have won the regional 6 times
And after going to 6 Super Regionals, we won the Super Regional 2 times

You make it seem like we only made it out of regionals twice. Rob is almost at a 50% clip on making it to Super Regionals,

ColoradoMooseHerd said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Everybody knows that. Using it as some type of blue star is silly though.

And let's face the absolute facts - we've made regionals. As stated, 13 years in a row. Great stat, not taking away from the fact that for 13 years we've been one of the top 21% of teams in the country.

But let's use your logic here - in order to get to Omaha, you have to make it out of regionals and Supers. In 13 years, we've eeked that out twice. .153%. Making a regional is great if your goal is to make a regional. Doesn't help to not get out of them if your goal is to win a championship though, which is the entire argument of the time for a change crowd.

RC is going to coach next season, I have no doubt about that. And I have no doubt we'll make a record 14th regional. I have every doubt we'll do anything beyond that.

---

Out of those 13 seasons, we have won the regional 6 times
And after going to 6 Super Regionals, we won the Super Regional 2 times

You make it seem like we only made it out of regionals twice. Rob is almost at a 50% clip on making it to Super Regionals,

---

This looks a lot like when people tried to ignore the difference in the original RC's record in the SWC vs the b12 and just focus on the overall.

During our time in the SEC, 7 years, we've only hosted 2 Regionals. We've been a 3 seed 3 times.

twk said:

---

Not a boomer. Try again. I don't think it's generational. I've run into plenty of old Ags who repeat the same nonsense that you type. Hell, they were typing it 20 years ago on this site. They were still typing after we fired Slocum, Fran, Sherman, and Sumlin. They will still be typing it in the future because its a convenient scapegoat argument.

---

dermdoc said:

---

twk said:

---

Not a boomer. Try again. I don't think it's generational. I've run into plenty of old Ags who repeat the same nonsense that you type. Hell, they were typing it 20 years ago on this site. They were still typing after we fired Slocum, Fran, Sherman, and Sumlin. They will still be typing it in the future because its a convenient scapegoat argument.

---

---

Were they right or wrong about those coaches? Were those coaches hired or given contract extensions with clauses approved by the AD? Or were they done by BMAs who don't face accountability for those decisions?

We let donors or BOR members run things and we wind up with Fran, Sherman, and ridiculously bad contract deals like we had with Sumlin.

When we do a professionally done, athletic director ran coaching search, we wind up with Jimbo.

BoozingAg said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

twk said:

---

Not a boomer. Try again. I don't think it's generational. I've run into plenty of old Ags who repeat the same nonsense that you type. Hell, they were typing it 20 years ago on this site. They were still typing after we fired Slocum, Fran, Sherman, and Sumlin. They will still be typing it in the future because its a convenient scapegoat argument.

---

---

Were they right or wrong about those coaches? Were those coaches hired or given contract extensions with clauses approved by the AD? Or were they done by BMAs who don't face accountability for those decisions?

We let donors or BOR members run things and we wind up with Fran, Sherman, and ridiculously bad contract deals like we had with Sumlin.

When we do a professionally done, athletic director ran coaching search, we wind up with Jimbo.

---

I agree with you however I do not think the answer is to gripe on a website and not donate so that you can have some input. And that is all I have been trying to say. We will agree to disagree.

And edited to add that I do not agree with putting the hiring of Fran with the bad contract extensions. At the time, everybody thought that was a home run hire. Bama folks were pissed at Fran leaving and basically threatened him and his family.

technoviking said:

---

---

Yeah we figured that

Captain Pablo said:

---

twk said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

twk said:

---

Quote:

---

What you call a defeatist I call a realist. Anyone thinking we are going to have some massive turnaround next year offensively, or that our pitching staff is going to somehow be better with who we are losing, is ignoring a lot of past data to the contrary. We don't know that we are going to have any new assistant coaches either, in all likelihood we will not.

---

Go back and re-read my post to make sure you didn't misunderstand. I'm not calling you a defeatist, I'm saying that for a coach in Rob's position to think that he can't take a stellar pitching staff, and turn around the worst offense any of us have ever seen to at least a competitive level would be a defeatist. In other words, any coach with any intestinal fortitude (and $2 million owed to him on his current contract) would stick it out expecting, not just hoping, to turn it around. It may or may not happen, but any coach worth having would feel that way.

---

Who cares how Rob feels?

Do you think he's getting the job one or not?

Do you think Rob's performance as head coach is good enough to warrant keeping him around?

I don't

---

The point of that reply was that it's hard to have a conversation/discussion with someone if they misunderstand what you are saying--or make a post which is not responsive.

As to your questions, with a $2 million buyout, 2 years left on the contract, and not starting until July 8, it's a bit of a reach to think that Bjork is going to make a change. I was extremely disappointed with what we saw this year because, for the first time since Wacha and Stripling, we had the arms to go out on Friday nights and expect (not just hope) to win. I figured mediocre production at the plate would be enough to have a really good season. I didn't expect to see what we saw at the plate. If I was the AD, given the contract and athletic department recent state of affairs, I'd probably tell Rob he's not getting an extension this year, even if that hurts recruiting, and that we will pay the buyout next year if we don't see results.

If we could make a change without paying $2 million, and had a top quality replacement waiting in the wings, I'd pull the trigger, because it has been 14 years, and making a change now would give the new guy a chance to start with a great pitching staff, and just needing to find about 3 good bats to have a really good first year. But, for a program with a $4 million budget, and an AD that just paid millions to buyout Kennedy and Sumlin, I couldn't do it.

---

Ok that's fair, And I agree

I do think that Texas A&M, and idiotic decisions by administrators, and/or Generous boosters that dermdoc idolizes

---

Link to my "idolizing"? Why all the projection? We get your opinion on past AD decisions. And that is fine. But please do not put words in my mouth. Thanks.

Captain Pablo said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

twk said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

twk said:

---

Quote:

---

What you call a defeatist I call a realist. Anyone thinking we are going to have some massive turnaround next year offensively, or that our pitching staff is going to somehow be better with who we are losing, is ignoring a lot of past data to the contrary. We don't know that we are going to have any new assistant coaches either, in all likelihood we will not.

---

Go back and re-read my post to make sure you didn't misunderstand. I'm not calling you a defeatist, I'm saying that for a coach in Rob's position to think that he can't take a stellar pitching staff, and turn around the worst offense any of us have ever seen to at least a competitive level would be a defeatist. In other words, any coach with any intestinal fortitude (and $2 million owed to him on his current contract) would stick it out expecting, not just hoping, to turn it around. It may or may not happen, but any coach worth having would feel that way.

---

Who cares how Rob feels?

Do you think he's getting the job one or not?

Do you think Rob's performance as head coach is good enough to warrant keeping him around?

I don't

---

The point of that reply was that it's hard to have a conversation/discussion with someone if they misunderstand what you are saying--or make a post which is not responsive.

As to your questions, with a $2 million buyout, 2 years left on the contract, and not starting until July 8, it's a bit of a reach to think that Bjork is going to make a change. I was extremely disappointed with what we saw this year because, for the first time since Wacha and Stripling, we had the arms to go out on Friday nights and expect (not just hope) to win. I figured mediocre production at the plate would be enough to have a really good season. I didn't expect to see what we saw at the plate. If I was the AD, given the contract and athletic department recent state of affairs, I'd probably tell Rob he's not getting an extension this year, even if that hurts recruiting, and that we will pay the buyout next year if we don't see results.

If we could make a change without paying $2 million, and had a top quality replacement waiting in the wings, I'd pull the trigger, because it has been 14 years, and making a change now would give the new guy a chance to start with a great pitching staff, and just needing to find about 3 good bats to have a really good first year. But, for a program with a $4 million budget, and an AD that just paid millions to buyout Kennedy and Sumlin, I couldn't do it.

---

Ok that's fair, And I agree

I do think that Texas A&M, and idiotic decisions by administrators, and/or Generous boosters that dermdoc idolizes

---

Link to my "idolizing"? Why all the projection? We get your opinion on past AD decisions. And that is fine. But please do not put words in my mouth. Thanks.

---

Tell you what. I'll try to get around to it when you make an actual argument on the topic posted instead of constant ad hominem attacks on other posters. I don't think you've made an argument of substance regarding Childress's performance, or the merits of retaining him or making a change, As well as his assistant coaches.

I don't think I have seen you make one argument of substance. All you do is attack posters based on how much money they have, Or how much they give away

So what is it?

What is your opinion of Rob children's, and his performance as a coach?

Do you think What is your opinion of Rob childress', and his performance as a coach?

Do you think his performance has earned the right to be retained?

Do you think he should make changes on his staff if he is retained?

What is your threshold for next year, in so far as retaining or dismissing Rob?

---

https://us.blastingnews.com/sports/2019/06/nebraska-baseball-will-reportedly-look-elsewhere-after-rob-childress-stays-at-texas-am-002929185.html





One more year, you can do it.

technoviking said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

twk said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

twk said:

---

Quote:

---

What you call a defeatist I call a realist. Anyone thinking we are going to have some massive turnaround next year offensively, or that our pitching staff is going to somehow be better with who we are losing, is ignoring a lot of past data to the contrary. We don't know that we are going to have any new assistant coaches either, in all likelihood we will not.

---

Go back and re-read my post to make sure you didn't misunderstand. I'm not calling you a defeatist, I'm saying that for a coach in Rob's position to think that he can't take a stellar pitching staff, and turn around the worst offense any of us have ever seen to at least a competitive level would be a defeatist. In other words, any coach with any intestinal fortitude (and $2 million owed to him on his current contract) would stick it out expecting, not just hoping, to turn it around. It may or may not happen, but any coach worth having would feel that way.

---

Who cares how Rob feels?

Do you think he's getting the job one or not?

Do you think Rob's performance as head coach is good enough to warrant keeping him around?

I don't

---

The point of that reply was that it's hard to have a conversation/discussion with someone if they misunderstand what you are saying--or make a post which is not responsive.

As to your questions, with a $2 million buyout, 2 years left on the contract, and not starting until July 8, it's a bit of a reach to think that Bjork is going to make a change. I was extremely disappointed with what we saw this year because, for the first time since Wacha and Stripling, we had the arms to go out on Friday nights and expect (not just hope) to win. I figured mediocre production at the plate would be enough to have a really good season. I didn't expect to see what we saw at the plate. If I was the AD, given the contract and athletic department recent state of affairs, I'd probably tell Rob he's not getting an extension this year, even if that hurts recruiting, and that we will pay the buyout next year if we don't see results.

If we could make a change without paying $2 million, and had a top quality replacement waiting in the wings, I'd pull the trigger, because it has been 14 years, and making a change now would give the new guy a chance to start with a great pitching staff, and just needing to find about 3 good bats to have a really good first year. But, for a program with a $4 million budget, and an AD that just paid millions to buyout Kennedy and Sumlin, I couldn't do it.

---

Ok that's fair, And I agree

I do think that Texas A&M, and idiotic decisions by administrators, and/or Generous boosters that dermdoc idolizes

---

Link to my "idolizing"? Why all the projection? We get your opinion on past AD decisions. And that is fine. But please do not put words in my mouth. Thanks.

---

Tell you what. I'll try to get around to it when you make an actual argument on the topic posted instead of constant ad hominem attacks on other posters. I don't think you've made an argument of substance regarding Childress's performance, or the merits of retaining him or making a change, As well as his assistant coaches.

I don't think I have seen you make one argument of substance. All you do is attack posters based on how much money they have, Or how much they give away

So what is it?

What is your opinion of Rob children's, and his performance as a coach?

Do you think What is your opinion of Rob childress', and his performance as a coach?

Do you think his performance has earned the right to be retained?

Do you think he should make changes on his staff if he is retained?

What is your threshold for next year, in so far as retaining or dismissing Rob?

---

https://us.blastingnews.com/sports/2019/06/nebraska-baseball-will-reportedly-look-elsewhere-after-rob-childress-stays-at-texas-am-002929185.html





One more year, you can do it.

---

I agree. ONE more year.

And man I think it could get ugly

TheAngelFlight said:

---

Dermdoc's a bit of a crybaby. In real life and on the Internet.

---

I don't know about that. He's great on other forums

But man he goes off the train tracks when it comes to Rob Childress and the baseball program

I guess he has stroke, and is perhaps friends with Rob and the Boys, and criticism of the baseball program is too personal

Interesting that this has gone on this long and no one has even attempted to make an argument that RC deserves to stay on, that he's earned that. Other than chester's "we made the post season, throw a parade" bs

So contract situation, which really has nothing to do with his performance, and having a proven ace and a talented pitching staff. News flash: we always have a talented pitching staff. What's that got us?