(11-18-2014 09:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Will somebody please define "getting us to the next level"? Once we, the employment committee, have a working definition, we can make sure it is incorporated into the next football HC contract, whether that contract is with Bailiff or somebody new.

Is it a couple of P5 wins, put way in the third quarter? is it a "signature" win? Two ? Three? Is it acceptance into a P5 conference? Winning that conference? Twice?

Is it competing for the NC? Winning it? Consistently?

While we are at it, we can include measures of preparedness and execution. Deductions for penalties, incomplete passes, and lost yardage. Double them if it happens again.

Sounds a bit draconian, I know, but it address the concerns we have been expressing here. I am OK with putting our requirements in writing.

One measure of preparedness/execution would be fewest penalty yards per game. here are the current NCAA standings in that category:

http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/698

I suggest we look in the top 20 to find our next coach. Some of those guys might be hard to hire away and/or pay, but I bet we could get the New Mexico State guy or the UTEP guy. Or maybe not.

when we shop for a new coach, or renew the old one, let's let him know what we expect.

Buddy, I think "getting to the next level" is pretty well defined here. Must we have a circular argument every single time someone says something critical of one of our programs or a coaching staff? Bailiff has taken us from being a laughing stock and amongst the worst 25 teams in the country to a moderate level of respectability. We're a Top 60 - 85 team that can usually beat teams ranked outside the Top 85, but that cannot compete against teams better than us, and certainly not against teams ranked inside the Top 50. That assessment is reality, whether you like the tone or not.

Taking us to the next level would be getting the program to where we are at worst a perennial Top 50 team (though some here think Top 35 is possible)-- a program that almost always beats teams worse than them, and can not only compete for 3 - 4 quarters against Top 25 caliber opponents, but occasionally gets the much-needed signature win. This is what is required to improve the national perception of our program, and to get us considered as a viable P5 candidate for the next round of realignment, which I believe is and should be our ultimate goal. From what I've seen the past 8 years-- which, IMO, is more than enough accumulated evidence and experience, Bailiff simply is not that person.