> During the big Baylor/TCU debate this past season, I got into a Twitter argument with a rivals writer from another site. He said his "eyeball test" told him TCU was better and, thus, more deserving. Of course I retaliated with 61-58 -- as well as Baylor's dominating statistics in that game -- but he wouldn't budge. He eventually said a 21-point comeback, basically, discredited Baylor. TCU just collapsed but was the better team that day. I told him if anything, it revealed a lot of character and determination on that Baylor team, traits that shouldn't be discounted. He countered with snark, saying something to the effect that heart/determination aren't exactly measurable statistics or characteristics of players and teams. To that, I replied: "Which is too bad. I bet every college coach would love to know about a player's character or mental makeup more than their 40 time."
> So where I am going with that first thought? What we, the public, don't know about any of Baylor's commitments is arguably the most important information about them: Their drive to succeed. We know their size, their speed, their high school statistics, and rivals uses all of that information to make its most educated guess on just how good that prospect is and can be. But how hungry are they? How committed to practice and the weight room will they be? How unafraid of fierce competition will they be? You can get a sense of a player's drive at the high school level, but things really change when they go from high schoolers to college football players. It's hard for analysts to predict if recruits will have what it takes, mentally, to be great at the next level. It's hard for coaches, too, but they have a major advantage. They've been forging relationships with these players for months, years for many of them. They know them personally -- far better than we'll ever know from watching their senior year highlights -- and have a greater chance of knowing if the guys they are recruiting have the right mentality to be Baylor Bears.
> I write all this because I know many of you -- myself included -- are disappointed the back-to-back Big 12 champions won't have a class that comes close to the season-ending No. 7 ranking. Not even close, really. The other four Power 5 conference champions are currently ranked 1 (Alabama), 4 (Florida State), 7 (Ohio State) and 16 (Oregon). And then there's Baylor sitting at No. 39, only four spots ahead of a program like Indiana. It is frustrating that Baylor isn't ranking where, I truly believe, it deserves to be. Baylor has a Heisman trophy and two conference titles in the past four years. It should be doing better. But having said all that, like living a life of faith, you have to believe in what this staff is doing and who they're targeting as recruits. You're probably tired of reading me write this, but Baylor doesn't offer players to fill up spaces. This class is now 19 strong -- that's three more commitments than we expected. Baylor could've stopped at 10-12 guys because of such a small senior class. But Baylor wants each of the guys it has landed commitments from, and the staff believes these are the players that will help Baylor continue to win the Big 12. They're not rated where we'd like them to be. But the staff has insights on these guys we don't, gained from interpersonal relationships. They know these guys inside and out, and I truly believe that what the coaches have learned about these 2- and 3-star recruits is that they all can play roles in keeping this program at the top, no matter what any ranking services say.
> Well, I'm feeling like I'm stepping off a soapbox after those opening thoughts. I just get a little frustrated -- removing myself from this site and taking the role of a fan -- to see Baylor miss on some bigger targets and have to "settle" for other targets. And then I get frustrated for thinking that, considering Baylor has won two titles mostly with classes that weren't ranked as high as No. 39. But you have to keep the faith in this staff. They're excellent talent evaluators and consistently have turned low-star guys into major players. One of our readers, 1845, said it best on another thread: They look at what players can be, not what they are. That's a very difficult thing to do. Like us putting faith in the staff, they have to put faith in their projections for every player they target. Who knows, in 5-6 years from now Tyrone Hunt could be playing in a Super Bowl. Hunt is a two-star guy that Baylor just pried away from UTSA, an FBS program less than a decade old. Only those two schools offered him. At 6-4, 230, he's nowhere near ready to play on a Big 12 defensive line. In two or three years, however -- all those years under Kaz's supervision -- he could turn into a monster. Not saying he will, but that's why the staff recruited him -- for his potential. That's how you have to look at many of Briles' recruits: what they can be. It would be nice to have eight 4-star players in this class, and I think Baylor will get there (they have four in this class but three already for 2016). Until then, don't let star rankings color your impression of Signing Day this week. This is a class full of players that Briles and his coaches deemed worthy of playing for Baylor. That's good enough for me.
> Anyway, I need to move on from this diatribe, because I'm short on time this week and really want to talk basketball. The win against Texas on Saturday was huge for this program's chances of doing what it's never done, making consecutive tourney appearances. As I've said before, 9-9 in Big 12 play gets you in. Beating Texas (by a whopping 23 points) got Baylor to 4-4, so five more wins are needed. There are three games left that I feel are must-wins: TCU on Wednesday and the home-and-home with Texas Tech. Win those three and Baylor just needs two more. You'd like to think the way Baylor's playing at home that home wins are far more likely. Because of that, I'd say the home games with Kansas State, Oklahoma State and West Virginia are the three most likely. so win two of those three (along with sweeping TCU/Tech) and Baylor's in. Get to nine conference wins, and then you enter bonus territory. Win any additional games over nine and now you're improving your seeding. Right now, I think Baylor's ceiling in Big 12 play is 11-7. That would entail winning out at home and stealing two on the road. The floor would be below 9-9 if Baylor has a lapse on Wednesday night and lost to TCU. Lose to TCU, and you have to make up for it with a road win at Kansas, Texas or Iowa State (who likes those chances?). It's possible to overlook them after the monstrous win over UT, followed by a road trip to West Virginia. TCU has been the doormat since it arrived, and sometimes motivation is lacking against inferior teams. Baylor can't afford to do so, but I don't think this team is susceptible to a no-show at home in league play. And especially not after Baylor needed overtime to beat TCU the first time. Big game Wednesday night, but they're all big from now on.
This post was edited on 2/2 2:36 PM by K Lonnquist
> So where I am going with that first thought? What we, the public, don't know about any of Baylor's commitments is arguably the most important information about them: Their drive to succeed. We know their size, their speed, their high school statistics, and rivals uses all of that information to make its most educated guess on just how good that prospect is and can be. But how hungry are they? How committed to practice and the weight room will they be? How unafraid of fierce competition will they be? You can get a sense of a player's drive at the high school level, but things really change when they go from high schoolers to college football players. It's hard for analysts to predict if recruits will have what it takes, mentally, to be great at the next level. It's hard for coaches, too, but they have a major advantage. They've been forging relationships with these players for months, years for many of them. They know them personally -- far better than we'll ever know from watching their senior year highlights -- and have a greater chance of knowing if the guys they are recruiting have the right mentality to be Baylor Bears.
> I write all this because I know many of you -- myself included -- are disappointed the back-to-back Big 12 champions won't have a class that comes close to the season-ending No. 7 ranking. Not even close, really. The other four Power 5 conference champions are currently ranked 1 (Alabama), 4 (Florida State), 7 (Ohio State) and 16 (Oregon). And then there's Baylor sitting at No. 39, only four spots ahead of a program like Indiana. It is frustrating that Baylor isn't ranking where, I truly believe, it deserves to be. Baylor has a Heisman trophy and two conference titles in the past four years. It should be doing better. But having said all that, like living a life of faith, you have to believe in what this staff is doing and who they're targeting as recruits. You're probably tired of reading me write this, but Baylor doesn't offer players to fill up spaces. This class is now 19 strong -- that's three more commitments than we expected. Baylor could've stopped at 10-12 guys because of such a small senior class. But Baylor wants each of the guys it has landed commitments from, and the staff believes these are the players that will help Baylor continue to win the Big 12. They're not rated where we'd like them to be. But the staff has insights on these guys we don't, gained from interpersonal relationships. They know these guys inside and out, and I truly believe that what the coaches have learned about these 2- and 3-star recruits is that they all can play roles in keeping this program at the top, no matter what any ranking services say.
> Well, I'm feeling like I'm stepping off a soapbox after those opening thoughts. I just get a little frustrated -- removing myself from this site and taking the role of a fan -- to see Baylor miss on some bigger targets and have to "settle" for other targets. And then I get frustrated for thinking that, considering Baylor has won two titles mostly with classes that weren't ranked as high as No. 39. But you have to keep the faith in this staff. They're excellent talent evaluators and consistently have turned low-star guys into major players. One of our readers, 1845, said it best on another thread: They look at what players can be, not what they are. That's a very difficult thing to do. Like us putting faith in the staff, they have to put faith in their projections for every player they target. Who knows, in 5-6 years from now Tyrone Hunt could be playing in a Super Bowl. Hunt is a two-star guy that Baylor just pried away from UTSA, an FBS program less than a decade old. Only those two schools offered him. At 6-4, 230, he's nowhere near ready to play on a Big 12 defensive line. In two or three years, however -- all those years under Kaz's supervision -- he could turn into a monster. Not saying he will, but that's why the staff recruited him -- for his potential. That's how you have to look at many of Briles' recruits: what they can be. It would be nice to have eight 4-star players in this class, and I think Baylor will get there (they have four in this class but three already for 2016). Until then, don't let star rankings color your impression of Signing Day this week. This is a class full of players that Briles and his coaches deemed worthy of playing for Baylor. That's good enough for me.
> Anyway, I need to move on from this diatribe, because I'm short on time this week and really want to talk basketball. The win against Texas on Saturday was huge for this program's chances of doing what it's never done, making consecutive tourney appearances. As I've said before, 9-9 in Big 12 play gets you in. Beating Texas (by a whopping 23 points) got Baylor to 4-4, so five more wins are needed. There are three games left that I feel are must-wins: TCU on Wednesday and the home-and-home with Texas Tech. Win those three and Baylor just needs two more. You'd like to think the way Baylor's playing at home that home wins are far more likely. Because of that, I'd say the home games with Kansas State, Oklahoma State and West Virginia are the three most likely. so win two of those three (along with sweeping TCU/Tech) and Baylor's in. Get to nine conference wins, and then you enter bonus territory. Win any additional games over nine and now you're improving your seeding. Right now, I think Baylor's ceiling in Big 12 play is 11-7. That would entail winning out at home and stealing two on the road. The floor would be below 9-9 if Baylor has a lapse on Wednesday night and lost to TCU. Lose to TCU, and you have to make up for it with a road win at Kansas, Texas or Iowa State (who likes those chances?). It's possible to overlook them after the monstrous win over UT, followed by a road trip to West Virginia. TCU has been the doormat since it arrived, and sometimes motivation is lacking against inferior teams. Baylor can't afford to do so, but I don't think this team is susceptible to a no-show at home in league play. And especially not after Baylor needed overtime to beat TCU the first time. Big game Wednesday night, but they're all big from now on.
This post was edited on 2/2 2:36 PM by K Lonnquist
