> Rather than rehash everything that's gone on with Baylor since I started at SicEmSports, today -- for my final edition of Shaw's Thoughts -- I want to talk about what can happen; what the future holds, in my best estimation, for Baylor. When I started with the site near the end of the 2011 football season, Baylor was in the midst of the "Year of the Bear," a cumulative season where Baylor set the NCAA record for most program wins in football plus men's and women's basketball. Back then, people had to wonder if Baylor could keep that up. Since the end of the 2011-12 sports year, however, have come two Big 12 titles in football, an NIT title plus Sweet 16 appearance in men's basketball, and three more conference titles for the women, who keep winning no matter who's in the starting lineup. Times are good -- better than even in that Year of the Bear, I truly believe -- but what must happen to keep it going? Will it last? I'll try to answer those best I can in my final column.
> When it comes to this football program, I think fans still need to be patient; patient when it comes to recruiting, and patient when it comes to respect. Let me elaborate, starting with the latter.
A program I think Baylor mirrors in several ways is Oregon. That program has reached the point where it gets the benefit of the doubt from the media and fans alike. People expect Oregon to be great; they're shocked when they lose a regular season game; they get a pass when they don't soundly beat inferior opponents. Baylor hasn't reached that level just yet, I believe, as evidenced by getting passed by Ohio State (a program that does get respect) for the playoffs, as well as the committee's refusal till the end to rank Baylor ahead of TCU. But, again, Baylor fans must be patient. Before the 2000 season, Oregon had never won 10 games in football. Baylor had a much richer history than Oregon prior to the new millennium. But since 2000, Oregon has won at least 10 games 10 times and has played for two national championships in the past five years. That kind of success has bought Oregon clout in college football. Baylor's not there yet, but Baylor's on a similar pace, if not ahead of Oregon. The Oregon architect, Mike Bellotti, didn't win at least 10 games until his sixth season. Briles accomplished that in his fourth. Bellotti only had back-to-back 10-win seasons once, something Briles just achieved. Bellotti coached 14 years at Oregon; Briles is just halfway there to that. If Briles is here seven years from now, I'm extremely excited to think about what Baylor will have accomplished by then.
Having said all that, for Baylor to reach the highest level, there's part of me that thinks Baylor can't do it until it proves it can win without Briles. That's unfair to exclude Baylor from the "elite" because of who the coach is. But right now, this is all about him. He's the face of Baylor football, and Baylor has him to thank for the recent success. As much as people were ready to write off Baylor post-RGIII, I think the general college football world will expect Baylor to fall off when Briles eventually retires (which I expect will come at Baylor). Even if Baylor wins a national title under him, I can see many people claiming the success had more to do with Briles and less with Baylor itself. Going back to the Oregon comparison, the Ducks experienced unprecedented success under Bellotti. But things have only improved since he left, first under Chip Kelly, and currently under Mark Helfrich. Both have taken Oregon to the title game, something Bellotti didn't do. Oregon is squarely on the map, something I began to understand was disrupting to the Pac-12 order when I talked with Washington fans at the Alamo Bowl in 2011. Washington was the old guard, begrudgingly (and perhaps with much denial) watching Oregon steal the torch. Similarly, Baylor's in position to take over the Big 12 as well, but it will take several more years to cement its place at or around the top of the Big 12. And, again, I think it could take Baylor continuing to win under a different coach. Win Big 12 titles after Briles is gone, and the nation won't be able to disrespect or ignore Baylor any longer. A new decade will have arrived.
There is little doubt in my mind that can happen. What Briles has done has been borderline miraculous. He has made believers out of every single person in the Baylor fan base. Even with these two recent New Year's Day disappointments, there's nobody in Baylor Nation that wants to see him go, and most probably believe Baylor's still ascending, not having peaked just yet. For all he has accomplished, however, credit must be given to his superiors (namely Ian McCaw, but also Ken Starr to a large degree), as well as the many donors that have stepped up financially to make sure Baylor stays on pace with its richer, larger peers. Because of that, I believe Baylor might even be ready on this very day to move on without Briles. I know some will disagree. It will be very hard to find a coach like him; someone with his wit and country charm' who knows the state's high school coaches like they're family; who embraces Baylor as his own. Baylor might never find a guy like him. But the main point is this: Baylor will try its hardest to get it done. Baylor has discovered money is made in college sports when you're willing to spend it. And with profit comes prestige. Baylor's rise in athletics has helped the university as a whole. There's no abandoning this model now. There's no guarantee that the next coach can duplicate what Briles has done; but it won't prevent Baylor from trying, and whoever comes in next (be it the younger Briles or someone from the outside) will inherit a championship-level program. No rebuilding job required.
As for the future of recruiting, well, recruits still often opt for tradition instead of trending. Baylor still has a way to go before becoming a "tradition program," one that people just assume year in, year out it will win many more games than it loses. One of the most impressionable stages for kids comes around 11-13 years old. When members of the 2015 class were those ages, Baylor was going 4-8, 4-8 and 7-6. Texas was going to national championships. Programs like Texas may not be on Baylor's level now, but they were well past Baylor not too long ago. Things will change, however, if Baylor keeps this up. With each successive signing class, Baylor will bring in kids that progressively are unaware that Baylor had a bad history. To them, Baylor's name will be associated with winning, playing in major bowl games and having a home that's as fine a stadium (and atmosphere) as any in the country. I think we're slready starting to see that with the 2016 class. And Baylor's already recruiting 2017 and 2018 kids; when they were 11 and 12, RGIII was accepting the Heisman Trophy, not mired in losing. Baylor has been a good to great program as long as their memories have been formative. So while I think Baylor should be recruiting better now, I think there are reasonable explanations for why they haven't. And I do see that changing as the 2015 class turns to 2016, and 2016 to 2017, and so on. Eventually, I truly believe, Baylor's class ranks will start to reflect the on-field rankings.
> I could write about football for a lot longer, but I think I've made my point. Baylor's here to stay so long as the program (and university) maintain the attitude that success in athletics has a direct and major effect on the health of the school. So now, I want to address the basketball programs and what the future holds for each.
I'll start with the men, a program that I should've fully bought into a couple years ago, but one this season that has earned my ultimate trust. Scott Drew has performed the greatest turnaround in college basketball history. I don't think you'll get too many arguments from people not associated with Baylor. But there was a small part of me that wondered if he was "losing his touch" on the recruiting trail, and if his coaching ability could maximize the potential of a team not loaded with 4- and 5-star players. This year has been an epiphany for a coach that's already provided several. Despite what happened against OSU last night, this is a great team, one who's effort reminds me of Drew's earliest teams, the ones that didn't win much but laid the groundwork for the future. Consider that outside of Rico Gathers, Baylor's top five other players (Motley, Prince, O'Neale, Medford and Chery) had offers from these other programs: St. Mary's, Evansville, Valpo, Missouri State, Clemson, Houston, Richmond, SMU, UTEP, Iona, LIU-Brooklyn, Colorado State, Wichita State, UT-Arlington and TCU. Drew has won many battles against major programs. He didn't have to do so with most of the guys getting major minutes for Baylor this season. Yet Baylor's in a position it has never reached under Drew: Making consecutive tourney appearances. That's almost certain; it will take a horrific collapse to prevent it. This season can be used for recruiting material as much as any prior. Drew has taken some relative nobodies and turned them into a top 20 team. So what little doubt I had about this program has been alleviated. Guys play hard for Drew. He's not John Wooden, but he's a far better in-game coach than many are willing to believe. And one thing I like about him above all else is what I love about Kim Mulkey
Like Drew, Mulkey is at Baylor for the long run. She's won two national titles at Baylor and numerous conference championships. Usually, that would mean another program poaching a successful small-school coach. Instead, Baylor has paid her handsomely, and she's rewarded the program by sticking around. Rich (in terms of tradition and money) programs have had job openings in recent years, from Texas to Tennessee to Duke, and she could've had any of those jobs if she wanted. Who knows, she might've actually been interested, but she's stayed with Baylor, because Baylor's been good to her -- better than to Drew, actually, who for whatever reason can't get his team in front of a packed house like the ladies regularly see. This program is likely in the best shape of any at Baylor. Most schools can only dream of this kind of consistency for a program; Baylor's blessed to have Mulkey, something the school can't ever forget.
> As for the other programs, only one really concerns me right now. Steve Smith's baseball club, which opens its season this week, is mired in a lull right now. His track record and history have earned him the right to try and steer it back into postseason contention, but I truly believe that needs to happen soon. Maybe even now. Baylor offers too much -- and is too dedicated to winning -- to allow the fourth major sport to lag so far behind the other three. Everywhere else, Baylor's either winning or has invested in building a winner. The tennis teams would be a crown jewel at most universities but can get overlooked here. Softball has a winner. Volleyball hit a downturn, but Baylor addressed that after the season. Minor sports like equestrian and acrobatics & tumbling have hired hugely successful coaches. Same for men's golf.
> In closing, the non-revenue sports are a reflection of Baylor's overall attitude about athletics: Unified dedication to winning. I'm not sure what the future holds for college athletics in general. I think major changes are coming, and it could affect everything we know, and not all in a positive manner. But, for now, we as Baylor fans are experiencing program-wide success that few others can claim. And so it's a pretty nice time for me to step down as the managing editor of this site and join you readers in the stands, even if I'll be an ocean away for the next few years. There's never been a better time to be a Baylor fan, and my best guess is that the good times won't see an end anytime soon -- again, as long as Baylor's committed to whatever it takes to achieve this kind of success. Thanks to everyone for being a member of this site, and especially to all of you that have expressed some kind words since announcing my departure. As I said last week, I may be leaving this job moving overseas, but as far as this site is concerned, I'm not going anywhere.
> When it comes to this football program, I think fans still need to be patient; patient when it comes to recruiting, and patient when it comes to respect. Let me elaborate, starting with the latter.
A program I think Baylor mirrors in several ways is Oregon. That program has reached the point where it gets the benefit of the doubt from the media and fans alike. People expect Oregon to be great; they're shocked when they lose a regular season game; they get a pass when they don't soundly beat inferior opponents. Baylor hasn't reached that level just yet, I believe, as evidenced by getting passed by Ohio State (a program that does get respect) for the playoffs, as well as the committee's refusal till the end to rank Baylor ahead of TCU. But, again, Baylor fans must be patient. Before the 2000 season, Oregon had never won 10 games in football. Baylor had a much richer history than Oregon prior to the new millennium. But since 2000, Oregon has won at least 10 games 10 times and has played for two national championships in the past five years. That kind of success has bought Oregon clout in college football. Baylor's not there yet, but Baylor's on a similar pace, if not ahead of Oregon. The Oregon architect, Mike Bellotti, didn't win at least 10 games until his sixth season. Briles accomplished that in his fourth. Bellotti only had back-to-back 10-win seasons once, something Briles just achieved. Bellotti coached 14 years at Oregon; Briles is just halfway there to that. If Briles is here seven years from now, I'm extremely excited to think about what Baylor will have accomplished by then.
Having said all that, for Baylor to reach the highest level, there's part of me that thinks Baylor can't do it until it proves it can win without Briles. That's unfair to exclude Baylor from the "elite" because of who the coach is. But right now, this is all about him. He's the face of Baylor football, and Baylor has him to thank for the recent success. As much as people were ready to write off Baylor post-RGIII, I think the general college football world will expect Baylor to fall off when Briles eventually retires (which I expect will come at Baylor). Even if Baylor wins a national title under him, I can see many people claiming the success had more to do with Briles and less with Baylor itself. Going back to the Oregon comparison, the Ducks experienced unprecedented success under Bellotti. But things have only improved since he left, first under Chip Kelly, and currently under Mark Helfrich. Both have taken Oregon to the title game, something Bellotti didn't do. Oregon is squarely on the map, something I began to understand was disrupting to the Pac-12 order when I talked with Washington fans at the Alamo Bowl in 2011. Washington was the old guard, begrudgingly (and perhaps with much denial) watching Oregon steal the torch. Similarly, Baylor's in position to take over the Big 12 as well, but it will take several more years to cement its place at or around the top of the Big 12. And, again, I think it could take Baylor continuing to win under a different coach. Win Big 12 titles after Briles is gone, and the nation won't be able to disrespect or ignore Baylor any longer. A new decade will have arrived.
There is little doubt in my mind that can happen. What Briles has done has been borderline miraculous. He has made believers out of every single person in the Baylor fan base. Even with these two recent New Year's Day disappointments, there's nobody in Baylor Nation that wants to see him go, and most probably believe Baylor's still ascending, not having peaked just yet. For all he has accomplished, however, credit must be given to his superiors (namely Ian McCaw, but also Ken Starr to a large degree), as well as the many donors that have stepped up financially to make sure Baylor stays on pace with its richer, larger peers. Because of that, I believe Baylor might even be ready on this very day to move on without Briles. I know some will disagree. It will be very hard to find a coach like him; someone with his wit and country charm' who knows the state's high school coaches like they're family; who embraces Baylor as his own. Baylor might never find a guy like him. But the main point is this: Baylor will try its hardest to get it done. Baylor has discovered money is made in college sports when you're willing to spend it. And with profit comes prestige. Baylor's rise in athletics has helped the university as a whole. There's no abandoning this model now. There's no guarantee that the next coach can duplicate what Briles has done; but it won't prevent Baylor from trying, and whoever comes in next (be it the younger Briles or someone from the outside) will inherit a championship-level program. No rebuilding job required.
As for the future of recruiting, well, recruits still often opt for tradition instead of trending. Baylor still has a way to go before becoming a "tradition program," one that people just assume year in, year out it will win many more games than it loses. One of the most impressionable stages for kids comes around 11-13 years old. When members of the 2015 class were those ages, Baylor was going 4-8, 4-8 and 7-6. Texas was going to national championships. Programs like Texas may not be on Baylor's level now, but they were well past Baylor not too long ago. Things will change, however, if Baylor keeps this up. With each successive signing class, Baylor will bring in kids that progressively are unaware that Baylor had a bad history. To them, Baylor's name will be associated with winning, playing in major bowl games and having a home that's as fine a stadium (and atmosphere) as any in the country. I think we're slready starting to see that with the 2016 class. And Baylor's already recruiting 2017 and 2018 kids; when they were 11 and 12, RGIII was accepting the Heisman Trophy, not mired in losing. Baylor has been a good to great program as long as their memories have been formative. So while I think Baylor should be recruiting better now, I think there are reasonable explanations for why they haven't. And I do see that changing as the 2015 class turns to 2016, and 2016 to 2017, and so on. Eventually, I truly believe, Baylor's class ranks will start to reflect the on-field rankings.
> I could write about football for a lot longer, but I think I've made my point. Baylor's here to stay so long as the program (and university) maintain the attitude that success in athletics has a direct and major effect on the health of the school. So now, I want to address the basketball programs and what the future holds for each.
I'll start with the men, a program that I should've fully bought into a couple years ago, but one this season that has earned my ultimate trust. Scott Drew has performed the greatest turnaround in college basketball history. I don't think you'll get too many arguments from people not associated with Baylor. But there was a small part of me that wondered if he was "losing his touch" on the recruiting trail, and if his coaching ability could maximize the potential of a team not loaded with 4- and 5-star players. This year has been an epiphany for a coach that's already provided several. Despite what happened against OSU last night, this is a great team, one who's effort reminds me of Drew's earliest teams, the ones that didn't win much but laid the groundwork for the future. Consider that outside of Rico Gathers, Baylor's top five other players (Motley, Prince, O'Neale, Medford and Chery) had offers from these other programs: St. Mary's, Evansville, Valpo, Missouri State, Clemson, Houston, Richmond, SMU, UTEP, Iona, LIU-Brooklyn, Colorado State, Wichita State, UT-Arlington and TCU. Drew has won many battles against major programs. He didn't have to do so with most of the guys getting major minutes for Baylor this season. Yet Baylor's in a position it has never reached under Drew: Making consecutive tourney appearances. That's almost certain; it will take a horrific collapse to prevent it. This season can be used for recruiting material as much as any prior. Drew has taken some relative nobodies and turned them into a top 20 team. So what little doubt I had about this program has been alleviated. Guys play hard for Drew. He's not John Wooden, but he's a far better in-game coach than many are willing to believe. And one thing I like about him above all else is what I love about Kim Mulkey
Like Drew, Mulkey is at Baylor for the long run. She's won two national titles at Baylor and numerous conference championships. Usually, that would mean another program poaching a successful small-school coach. Instead, Baylor has paid her handsomely, and she's rewarded the program by sticking around. Rich (in terms of tradition and money) programs have had job openings in recent years, from Texas to Tennessee to Duke, and she could've had any of those jobs if she wanted. Who knows, she might've actually been interested, but she's stayed with Baylor, because Baylor's been good to her -- better than to Drew, actually, who for whatever reason can't get his team in front of a packed house like the ladies regularly see. This program is likely in the best shape of any at Baylor. Most schools can only dream of this kind of consistency for a program; Baylor's blessed to have Mulkey, something the school can't ever forget.
> As for the other programs, only one really concerns me right now. Steve Smith's baseball club, which opens its season this week, is mired in a lull right now. His track record and history have earned him the right to try and steer it back into postseason contention, but I truly believe that needs to happen soon. Maybe even now. Baylor offers too much -- and is too dedicated to winning -- to allow the fourth major sport to lag so far behind the other three. Everywhere else, Baylor's either winning or has invested in building a winner. The tennis teams would be a crown jewel at most universities but can get overlooked here. Softball has a winner. Volleyball hit a downturn, but Baylor addressed that after the season. Minor sports like equestrian and acrobatics & tumbling have hired hugely successful coaches. Same for men's golf.
> In closing, the non-revenue sports are a reflection of Baylor's overall attitude about athletics: Unified dedication to winning. I'm not sure what the future holds for college athletics in general. I think major changes are coming, and it could affect everything we know, and not all in a positive manner. But, for now, we as Baylor fans are experiencing program-wide success that few others can claim. And so it's a pretty nice time for me to step down as the managing editor of this site and join you readers in the stands, even if I'll be an ocean away for the next few years. There's never been a better time to be a Baylor fan, and my best guess is that the good times won't see an end anytime soon -- again, as long as Baylor's committed to whatever it takes to achieve this kind of success. Thanks to everyone for being a member of this site, and especially to all of you that have expressed some kind words since announcing my departure. As I said last week, I may be leaving this job moving overseas, but as far as this site is concerned, I'm not going anywhere.
