http://www.ricefootball.net

One of the best press conferences JK has given.

His best feature is definitely hiring coaches IMO.

Just watched the video. Thanks to PTH for putting it up.

Listening to JK's presser and trying to read between the lines... we might be in for a surprise pick. He really went out of his way to say that the names that had popped up were pure speculation. He also took great pains to de-emphasize his Stanford connection in relation to the search.

But my reaction to this video is that he's done his homework in setting up the parameters he wants in a HC candidate ... as he did in choosing both new BB coaches... and I think we will see a young-ish guy with HC coaching experience at some level that will be aggressive and "creative".

The head coach thing may disqualify two guys I like (Jasper, Grinch). Although it does appear that Leach has pretty much let Grinch be head coach of the defense. He sort of did the same thing with Ruffin McNeill at TT, and Ruffin went on to have a decent run at East Carolina, 4 bowls in 6 years, winning overall record. FWIW, I think Grinch's Wazzu defenses have been better than McNeill's TT defenses were.

Many thanks for the video PTH

"Compensation won't be a deciding factor"
Hmmmm

I liked everything I heard, thanks for the video!

As usual, thanks for posting. Love to see the unedited, unfiltered view(s), able to read the body language, and between the lines. Would recommend to all investing the 11 minutes of your time to watch the entire thing vs. all the conjecture/opinion here.

Of course that means I will offer up my conjecture/opinion..and that overall, JK did a nice job on the presser. Would have started more about the future/optimism of Rice football vs. 'sad day' but understand why he went that direction.

Positives
Liked him taking ownership. Not hiding behind the BoT, Administration, Recruiting Firm, etc. Clear that it is on his watch. Good and bad to hear all the 'I's' vs. 'we's' he was using.

Like laying out a different approach and willing to challenge conventional wisdom. Like him referencing goal of being 'in the conversation for New Years Bowl' as a vision for the program. And also liked the, 'compensation is not a concern' comment.

Interesting callout on early signing and impact on midseason firings this year at other places and how that was a consideration.

My only negative/pop psychology between-the-lines is that he did come off a bit pissed/frustrated about the entire situation. I sensed he wanted to be a bit more passionate about firing up Rice fans for the future and how things are going to improve but 'right thing' was to pay tribute/respects to DB's decade at Rice and thus he did not throw him under-the-bus at all but sensed he wanted to at times. Though he threaded that past vs. future needle today but could nit that it maybe came off as a bit scripted vs. what he was really feeling. As a fan, would have liked to see more passion/hope about the future but understand all the other stakeholders he has to also consider (players, coaches, DB himself, influential ex-FB players, etc.). I think he is upset at himself that those other stakeholders managed to influence him for as long as they did while the lack of competitiveness on the scoreboard was telling a different story for many years, but he can't say that publicly..but I got that from the body language.

All-in-all, thought he was clear, articulate, correctly respectful of DB, and has urgency while simultaneously being thoughtful about what is next for Rice Football.

Feel better today for future of Rice Football than I did last week.

I may be taking JK’s comments too literally, but “creativity, curiosity, innovation”; “somebody who can look at the way things have been done here and question all of it”; and “somebody who is going to embrace a different mindset” screams Kevin Kelley to me. For those unfamiliar, he is the head coach at Pulaski Academy in Little Rock that is often referred to as “the coach who never punts and always onside kicks.”

Here is a good article from Sports Illustrated on Coach Kelley and why a college program—like Rice—should adopt his philosophy. The power of punting: Why a college coach should adopt Kevin Kelley's unconventional philosophy

Here is a podcast featuring a discussion with Coach Kelley that gives some good insight into his philosophy. Advanced Football Analytics Podcast

I kind of like the idea. It would be a huge risk but at this point what do we have to lose.

(11-28-2017 12:37 AM)Owlmar Little Wrote:  I may be taking JK’s comments too literally, but “creativity, curiosity, innovation”; “somebody who can look at the way things have been done here and question all of it”; and “somebody who is going to embrace a different mindset” screams Kevin Kelley to me. For those unfamiliar, he is the head coach at Pulaski Academy in Little Rock that is often referred to as “the coach who never punts and always onside kicks.”

Here is a good article from Sports Illustrated on Coach Kelley and why a college program—like Rice—should adopt his philosophy. The power of punting: Why a college coach should adopt Kevin Kelley's unconventional philosophy

Here is a podcast featuring a discussion with Coach Kelley that gives some good insight into his philosophy. Advanced Football Analytics Podcast

I kind of like the idea. It would be a huge risk but at this point what do we have to lose.

Wade Townsend agrees with you.

(11-28-2017 12:17 AM)owl40 Wrote:  I think he is upset at himself that those other stakeholders managed to influence him for as long as they did while the lack of competitiveness on the scoreboard was telling a different story for many years, but he can't say that publicly..but I got that from the body language.

So did I.

This is a big hire for him.

(11-28-2017 12:47 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 12:37 AM)Owlmar Little Wrote:  I may be taking JK’s comments too literally, but “creativity, curiosity, innovation”; “somebody who can look at the way things have been done here and question all of it”; and “somebody who is going to embrace a different mindset” screams Kevin Kelley to me. For those unfamiliar, he is the head coach at Pulaski Academy in Little Rock that is often referred to as “the coach who never punts and always onside kicks.”

Here is a good article from Sports Illustrated on Coach Kelley and why a college program—like Rice—should adopt his philosophy. The power of punting: Why a college coach should adopt Kevin Kelley's unconventional philosophy

Here is a podcast featuring a discussion with Coach Kelley that gives some good insight into his philosophy. Advanced Football Analytics Podcast

I kind of like the idea. It would be a huge risk but at this point what do we have to lose.

Wade Townsend agrees with you.

I think that may be Wade. :--)

(11-28-2017 06:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 12:17 AM)owl40 Wrote:  I think he is upset at himself that those other stakeholders managed to influence him for as long as they did while the lack of competitiveness on the scoreboard was telling a different story for many years, but he can't say that publicly..but I got that from the body language.

So did I.

This is a big hire for him.

No question, and he knows it. As for those to argue there's nothing to lose it taking a big risk on this hire, I'd strong disagree-- this time may in fact be make or break for Rice football. Yes, we need a guy who will be creative and innovative to get the most out of our personnel, but we need a guy who is a proven winner, even if only at the high school level. It's why I REALLY like the Stanford DC. The guy is high energy, charismatic, a great recruiter (recognizing that it's much easier to recruit at Stanford than Rice) and still only in his mid-40s (my guess at his age). To have any chance at landing him, however, would require a signficant boost in salary budget.

(11-28-2017 08:24 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 12:47 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 12:37 AM)Owlmar Little Wrote:  I may be taking JK’s comments too literally, but “creativity, curiosity, innovation”; “somebody who can look at the way things have been done here and question all of it”; and “somebody who is going to embrace a different mindset” screams Kevin Kelley to me. For those unfamiliar, he is the head coach at Pulaski Academy in Little Rock that is often referred to as “the coach who never punts and always onside kicks.”

Here is a good article from Sports Illustrated on Coach Kelley and why a college program—like Rice—should adopt his philosophy. The power of punting: Why a college coach should adopt Kevin Kelley's unconventional philosophy

Here is a podcast featuring a discussion with Coach Kelley that gives some good insight into his philosophy. Advanced Football Analytics Podcast

I kind of like the idea. It would be a huge risk but at this point what do we have to lose.

Wade Townsend agrees with you.

I think that may be Wade. :--)

Haha. Not Wade, but you know what they say about great minds...

(11-28-2017 08:30 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 06:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 12:17 AM)owl40 Wrote:  I think he is upset at himself that those other stakeholders managed to influence him for as long as they did while the lack of competitiveness on the scoreboard was telling a different story for many years, but he can't say that publicly..but I got that from the body language.

So did I.

This is a big hire for him.

No question, and he knows it. As for those to argue there's nothing to lose it taking a big risk on this hire, I'd strong disagree-- this time may in fact be make or break for Rice football. Yes, we need a guy who will be creative and innovative to get the most out of our personnel, but we need a guy who is a proven winner, even if only at the high school level. It's why I REALLY like the Stanford DC. The guy is high energy, charismatic, a great recruiter (recognizing that it's much easier to recruit at Stanford than Rice) and still only in his mid-40s (my guess at his age). To have any chance at landing him, however, would require a signficant boost in salary budget.

Walt – I absolutely agree that this is a big hire, but don’t know that I’d call it make or break. If we’re being honest, how much worse can things get for Rice Football from where we sit today (looking strickly from the view that we will remain in FBS). That’s why I say we have nothing to lose (and everything to gain) by trying something different. Coach Kelley has demonstrated success at the high school level and, while there is not guarantee that his success will translate to the college level (see Todd Dodge), we at least know that the program is completely his. It’s why I also like the idea of Alex Grinch—Leach is all offense so we know the WSU defense is Grinch’s. And it is why I’m not as high on some of the candidates that have been mentioned—e.g., Troy Walters (that’s Scott Frost’s offense not his) and Mike Bloomgren (that’s David Shaw’s offense not his).

I also really like the Stanford DC. It sounds like he has all the qualities we need in a head coach, but two things give me pause: First, as you noted, recruiting to Rice and recruiting to Stanford are vastly different endeavors—however, I do like that he was on Harbaugh’s initial staff and, at least at the beginning, had to recruit without the results to back up what he was selling. Second, I worry about what his defense looks like when it is not paired with a ball control, ground-and-pound offense. I may be wrong, but I just don’t see the Stanford offensive model working at Rice—we’re going to need a spread, up tempo offense that plays to the skill sets of our primary recruiting base (i.e. Texas high schools).

(11-28-2017 12:37 AM)Owlmar Little Wrote:  I may be taking JK’s comments too literally, but “creativity, curiosity, innovation”; “somebody who can look at the way things have been done here and question all of it”; and “somebody who is going to embrace a different mindset” screams Kevin Kelley to me. For those unfamiliar, he is the head coach at Pulaski Academy in Little Rock that is often referred to as “the coach who never punts and always onside kicks.”

Here is a good article from Sports Illustrated on Coach Kelley and why a college program—like Rice—should adopt his philosophy. The power of punting: Why a college coach should adopt Kevin Kelley's unconventional philosophy

Here is a podcast featuring a discussion with Coach Kelley that gives some good insight into his philosophy. Advanced Football Analytics Podcast

I kind of like the idea. It would be a huge risk but at this point what do we have to lose.

Kelley is intriguing, but you are right, he'd be a huge risk, especially seeing as he has never coached collegiately, much less as a college football head coach. Ask our friends in Denton how the Todd Dodge experiment went. But I would be in favor of having Kelley come in as our Offensive Coordinator - it would be a similar trajectory to that of Gus Malzahn (longtime Arkansas high school coach; jump to college as an offensive coordinator).

As for JK, after watching his press conference in its entirety (thanks ricefootballnet!) I feel better about the decision and where we appear to be going. I liked his comments about wanting a coach who will look at everything and question why we have/have not done something a particular way. Or that compensation would not be an obstacle. I wonder if some sort of quid pro quo was made with the decisionmakers/BOT/25(0) that Bailiff would get the 2017, but if he failed, JK would get what he needs/wants for the next coach. Regardless, JK knows this is a big decision for the university - and for him professionally - and I am excited to see what he comes up with.

(11-28-2017 10:40 AM)Owlmar Little Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 08:30 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 06:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 12:17 AM)owl40 Wrote:  I think he is upset at himself that those other stakeholders managed to influence him for as long as they did while the lack of competitiveness on the scoreboard was telling a different story for many years, but he can't say that publicly..but I got that from the body language.

So did I.

This is a big hire for him.

No question, and he knows it. As for those to argue there's nothing to lose it taking a big risk on this hire, I'd strong disagree-- this time may in fact be make or break for Rice football. Yes, we need a guy who will be creative and innovative to get the most out of our personnel, but we need a guy who is a proven winner, even if only at the high school level. It's why I REALLY like the Stanford DC. The guy is high energy, charismatic, a great recruiter (recognizing that it's much easier to recruit at Stanford than Rice) and still only in his mid-40s (my guess at his age). To have any chance at landing him, however, would require a signficant boost in salary budget.

Walt – I absolutely agree that this is a big hire, but don’t know that I’d call it make or break. If we’re being honest, how much worse can things get for Rice Football from where we sit today (looking strickly from the view that we will remain in FBS). That’s why I say we have nothing to lose (and everything to gain) by trying something different. Coach Kelley has demonstrated success at the high school level and, while there is not guarantee that his success will translate to the college level (see Todd Dodge), we at least know that the program is completely his. It’s why I also like the idea of Alex Grinch—Leach is all offense so we know the WSU defense is Grinch’s. And it is why I’m not as high on some of the candidates that have been mentioned—e.g., Troy Walters (that’s Scott Frost’s offense not his) and Mike Bloomgren (that’s David Shaw’s offense not his).

I also really like the Stanford DC. It sounds like he has all the qualities we need in a head coach, but two things give me pause: First, as you noted, recruiting to Rice and recruiting to Stanford are vastly different endeavors—however, I do like that he was on Harbaugh’s initial staff and, at least at the beginning, had to recruit without the results to back up what he was selling. Second, I worry about what his defense looks like when it is not paired with a ball control, ground-and-pound offense. I may be wrong, but I just don’t see the Stanford offensive model working at Rice—we’re going to need a spread, up tempo offense that plays to the skill sets of our primary recruiting base (i.e. Texas high schools).

As I said earlier when expressing my concern with hiring Stanford's OC, the Cardinal offensive model will never work at Rice since it's predicated on recruiting 4- and 5-star offensive linemen.

(11-28-2017 10:40 AM)Owlmar Little Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 08:30 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 06:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 12:17 AM)owl40 Wrote:  I think he is upset at himself that those other stakeholders managed to influence him for as long as they did while the lack of competitiveness on the scoreboard was telling a different story for many years, but he can't say that publicly..but I got that from the body language.

So did I.

This is a big hire for him.

No question, and he knows it. As for those to argue there's nothing to lose it taking a big risk on this hire, I'd strong disagree-- this time may in fact be make or break for Rice football. Yes, we need a guy who will be creative and innovative to get the most out of our personnel, but we need a guy who is a proven winner, even if only at the high school level. It's why I REALLY like the Stanford DC. The guy is high energy, charismatic, a great recruiter (recognizing that it's much easier to recruit at Stanford than Rice) and still only in his mid-40s (my guess at his age). To have any chance at landing him, however, would require a signficant boost in salary budget.

Walt – I absolutely agree that this is a big hire, but don’t know that I’d call it make or break. If we’re being honest, how much worse can things get for Rice Football from where we sit today (looking strickly from the view that we will remain in FBS). That’s why I say we have nothing to lose (and everything to gain) by trying something different. Coach Kelley has demonstrated success at the high school level and, while there is not guarantee that his success will translate to the college level (see Todd Dodge), we at least know that the program is completely his. It’s why I also like the idea of Alex Grinch—Leach is all offense so we know the WSU defense is Grinch’s. And it is why I’m not as high on some of the candidates that have been mentioned—e.g., Troy Walters (that’s Scott Frost’s offense not his) and Mike Bloomgren (that’s David Shaw’s offense not his).

I also really like the Stanford DC. It sounds like he has all the qualities we need in a head coach, but two things give me pause: First, as you noted, recruiting to Rice and recruiting to Stanford are vastly different endeavors—however, I do like that he was on Harbaugh’s initial staff and, at least at the beginning, had to recruit without the results to back up what he was selling. Second, I worry about what his defense looks like when it is not paired with a ball control, ground-and-pound offense. I may be wrong, but I just don’t see the Stanford offensive model working at Rice—we’re going to need a spread, up tempo offense that plays to the skill sets of our primary recruiting base (i.e. Texas high schools).

I'm going to agree with Walt. The next ticking time bomb in the college landscape is, more than likely, the Big 12 TV Deal expiring during the 2024-25 school year. After the expansion fiasco awhile back, many college sports pundits wondered about the Big 12's future as UT and OU more than likely will move on to greener pastures. This would leave the other 8 Big 12 schools scrambling for homes. It is imperative that we have our house in order so that we can attempt to improve our lot in the realignment that is bound to take place. And, as other conference realignment moves have shown, football drives the bus. It will be extremely difficult to be in the best position possible if this hire fails; there just isn't much time left until these things start to shake out. We have to be showing some sustained success as well as some university investment into the program when this stuff starts going down.

I will also say that this is an extremely important hire for Joe as it relates to his reputation as an AD. Would be a huge boost for him if he nails this.

(11-28-2017 10:55 AM)Pimpa Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 12:37 AM)Owlmar Little Wrote:  I may be taking JK’s comments too literally, but “creativity, curiosity, innovation”; “somebody who can look at the way things have been done here and question all of it”; and “somebody who is going to embrace a different mindset” screams Kevin Kelley to me. For those unfamiliar, he is the head coach at Pulaski Academy in Little Rock that is often referred to as “the coach who never punts and always onside kicks.”

Here is a good article from Sports Illustrated on Coach Kelley and why a college program—like Rice—should adopt his philosophy. The power of punting: Why a college coach should adopt Kevin Kelley's unconventional philosophy

Here is a podcast featuring a discussion with Coach Kelley that gives some good insight into his philosophy. Advanced Football Analytics Podcast

I kind of like the idea. It would be a huge risk but at this point what do we have to lose.

Kelley is intriguing, but you are right, he'd be a huge risk, especially seeing as he has never coached collegiately, much less as a college football head coach. Ask our friends in Denton how the Todd Dodge experiment went. But I would be in favor of having Kelley come in as our Offensive Coordinator - it would be a similar trajectory to that of Gus Malzahn (longtime Arkansas high school coach; jump to college as an offensive coordinator).

As for JK, after watching his press conference in its entirety (thanks ricefootballnet!) I feel better about the decision and where we appear to be going. I liked his comments about wanting a coach who will look at everything and question why we have/have not done something a particular way. Or that compensation would not be an obstacle. I wonder if some sort of quid pro quo was made with the decisionmakers/BOT/25(0) that Bailiff would get the 2017, but if he failed, JK would get what he needs/wants for the next coach. Regardless, JK knows this is a big decision for the university - and for him professionally - and I am excited to see what he comes up with.

Have it on pretty good authority that is exactly what happened.

(11-28-2017 11:54 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 10:40 AM)Owlmar Little Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 08:30 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 06:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 12:17 AM)owl40 Wrote:  I think he is upset at himself that those other stakeholders managed to influence him for as long as they did while the lack of competitiveness on the scoreboard was telling a different story for many years, but he can't say that publicly..but I got that from the body language.

So did I.

This is a big hire for him.

No question, and he knows it. As for those to argue there's nothing to lose it taking a big risk on this hire, I'd strong disagree-- this time may in fact be make or break for Rice football. Yes, we need a guy who will be creative and innovative to get the most out of our personnel, but we need a guy who is a proven winner, even if only at the high school level. It's why I REALLY like the Stanford DC. The guy is high energy, charismatic, a great recruiter (recognizing that it's much easier to recruit at Stanford than Rice) and still only in his mid-40s (my guess at his age). To have any chance at landing him, however, would require a signficant boost in salary budget.

Walt – I absolutely agree that this is a big hire, but don’t know that I’d call it make or break. If we’re being honest, how much worse can things get for Rice Football from where we sit today (looking strickly from the view that we will remain in FBS). That’s why I say we have nothing to lose (and everything to gain) by trying something different. Coach Kelley has demonstrated success at the high school level and, while there is not guarantee that his success will translate to the college level (see Todd Dodge), we at least know that the program is completely his. It’s why I also like the idea of Alex Grinch—Leach is all offense so we know the WSU defense is Grinch’s. And it is why I’m not as high on some of the candidates that have been mentioned—e.g., Troy Walters (that’s Scott Frost’s offense not his) and Mike Bloomgren (that’s David Shaw’s offense not his).

I also really like the Stanford DC. It sounds like he has all the qualities we need in a head coach, but two things give me pause: First, as you noted, recruiting to Rice and recruiting to Stanford are vastly different endeavors—however, I do like that he was on Harbaugh’s initial staff and, at least at the beginning, had to recruit without the results to back up what he was selling. Second, I worry about what his defense looks like when it is not paired with a ball control, ground-and-pound offense. I may be wrong, but I just don’t see the Stanford offensive model working at Rice—we’re going to need a spread, up tempo offense that plays to the skill sets of our primary recruiting base (i.e. Texas high schools).

I'm going to agree with Walt. The next ticking time bomb in the college landscape is, more than likely, the Big 12 TV Deal expiring during the 2024-25 school year. After the expansion fiasco awhile back, many college sports pundits wondered about the Big 12's future as UT and OU more than likely will move on to greener pastures. This would leave the other 8 Big 12 schools scrambling for homes. It is imperative that we have our house in order so that we can attempt to improve our lot in the realignment that is bound to take place. And, as other conference realignment moves have shown, football drives the bus. It will be extremely difficult to be in the best position possible if this hire fails; there just isn't much time left until these things start to shake out. We have to be showing some sustained success as well as some university investment into the program when this stuff starts going down.

I will also say that this is an extremely important hire for Joe as it relates to his reputation as an AD. Would be a huge boost for him if he nails this.

If the Big XII loses UT and OU.. it basically becomes a glorified version of the AAC. Their revenues will plummet and the remaining 8 schools will be cast off into the G5 for all practical purposes.

The above aside, the next round of realignment isn't likely to be like it was before with gargantuan amounts of money tied to conference TV contracts. By 2025, nearly all programming will be on demand and PPV/part of a package.. that benefits teams with large fan bases and good play, as well as the usual powerhouses.

(11-28-2017 12:28 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 11:54 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 10:40 AM)Owlmar Little Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 08:30 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-28-2017 06:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  So did I.

This is a big hire for him.

No question, and he knows it. As for those to argue there's nothing to lose it taking a big risk on this hire, I'd strong disagree-- this time may in fact be make or break for Rice football. Yes, we need a guy who will be creative and innovative to get the most out of our personnel, but we need a guy who is a proven winner, even if only at the high school level. It's why I REALLY like the Stanford DC. The guy is high energy, charismatic, a great recruiter (recognizing that it's much easier to recruit at Stanford than Rice) and still only in his mid-40s (my guess at his age). To have any chance at landing him, however, would require a signficant boost in salary budget.

Walt – I absolutely agree that this is a big hire, but don’t know that I’d call it make or break. If we’re being honest, how much worse can things get for Rice Football from where we sit today (looking strickly from the view that we will remain in FBS). That’s why I say we have nothing to lose (and everything to gain) by trying something different. Coach Kelley has demonstrated success at the high school level and, while there is not guarantee that his success will translate to the college level (see Todd Dodge), we at least know that the program is completely his. It’s why I also like the idea of Alex Grinch—Leach is all offense so we know the WSU defense is Grinch’s. And it is why I’m not as high on some of the candidates that have been mentioned—e.g., Troy Walters (that’s Scott Frost’s offense not his) and Mike Bloomgren (that’s David Shaw’s offense not his).

I also really like the Stanford DC. It sounds like he has all the qualities we need in a head coach, but two things give me pause: First, as you noted, recruiting to Rice and recruiting to Stanford are vastly different endeavors—however, I do like that he was on Harbaugh’s initial staff and, at least at the beginning, had to recruit without the results to back up what he was selling. Second, I worry about what his defense looks like when it is not paired with a ball control, ground-and-pound offense. I may be wrong, but I just don’t see the Stanford offensive model working at Rice—we’re going to need a spread, up tempo offense that plays to the skill sets of our primary recruiting base (i.e. Texas high schools).

I'm going to agree with Walt. The next ticking time bomb in the college landscape is, more than likely, the Big 12 TV Deal expiring during the 2024-25 school year. After the expansion fiasco awhile back, many college sports pundits wondered about the Big 12's future as UT and OU more than likely will move on to greener pastures. This would leave the other 8 Big 12 schools scrambling for homes. It is imperative that we have our house in order so that we can attempt to improve our lot in the realignment that is bound to take place. And, as other conference realignment moves have shown, football drives the bus. It will be extremely difficult to be in the best position possible if this hire fails; there just isn't much time left until these things start to shake out. We have to be showing some sustained success as well as some university investment into the program when this stuff starts going down.

I will also say that this is an extremely important hire for Joe as it relates to his reputation as an AD. Would be a huge boost for him if he nails this.

If the Big XII loses UT and OU.. it basically becomes a glorified version of the AAC. Their revenues will plummet and the remaining 8 schools will be cast off into the G5 for all practical purposes.

The above aside, the next round of realignment isn't likely to be like it was before with gargantuan amounts of money tied to conference TV contracts. By 2025, nearly all programming will be on demand and PPV/part of a package.. that benefits teams with large fan bases and good play, as well as the usual powerhouses.

Understood, but it would be a significantly better place than we are in right now. Even with all systems go, I'm not sure we can get into a power conference. But, I think we could improve our lot when the movement does occur.