(01-10-2022 02:48 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think lots of Bailiff's teams could have, would have won those games. How about the Texas Bowl champs, with Thor/JD/CC? You think they could not have beaten UAB 2006 or ECU 2006 or SMU 2006? I guess we will have to disagree on that one, friend.
Bailiff's problem was not being able to maintain or build on success.
But the topic is not who was the better coach, Bailiff or Toad. If we are going to compare coaches, I want to throw in Hatfield, Neely, and Heisman.
Todd is a sleaze., period. Glad he is gone. He did us a favor when he stabbed us in the back. Could anybody else have taken us to a 7-5 record in 2006? Heck, yeah. lots of them. And a bunch of them would have won the bowl, too.
Tired of beating this dead horse. Any of y'all who want to revere the memory of Todd in any way, go right ahead. The empty pew in the back is mine.

I am not revering the memory of Turd in any way, and quite frankly I resent having my comments mischaracterized in that way. I am at least as happy as you are that he is gone, and am on record many times as saying that. I pretty much think that when he told CDC about the Tulsa offer, probably expecting CDC to match it, he was instead told not to let the door hit him in the ass on the way out, and I for one wholeheartedly applaud that.

I think Turd would have squeezed more out of his talent than Bailiff did, but his personal characteristics as a jerk and a creep would have negatively affected recruiting in ways that would have left him with less talent to work with than Bailiff had. That seems to have been what has happened to him at every dream job stop since Rice, and with good reason.

I am much less certain than you that there are lots of coaches who could have taken the 2006 team to a 7-5 record, or won the bowl game. Remember that basically the same talent went 1-10 the year before, and 3-9 the year after, with the addition of Thor.

I saw some football coach list the requirements to win football games, in order of importance, as:

1-Talent
2-Execution
3-Scheme
4-Attitude/Motivation

I think Bailiff would always attract better talent than Turd, because he is basically a better person, and recruits pick up on that.
I think Turd's teams would have executed much better. As an aside, what I really, really like about RUOwls's approach is the emphasis on execution.
I don't find anything particularly remarkable about either of their schemes, which is particularly unfortunate since my own belief is that Rice requires contrarian schemes in order to succeed.
I think Turd's intense rah-rah approach works for attitude/motivation initially, but I think his act wears out in a hurry. Again, that seems to be what has happened everywhere he has been since leaving Rice.