Texas Tech may steal Chris Beard from UNLV

[KBaden145]

Beard to Tech is a done deal.

Major downgrade for them, IMO. They have some nice pieces coming back but they won't be as good as they would have with Tubby.

 

[bgrch1350]

Major downgrade for them, IMO. They have some nice pieces coming back but they won't be as good as they would have with Tubby.

Its obviously a downgrade from Tubby but they didn't really have a choice. However, they are getting someone who wants to be there and is willing to leave UNLV to come there. Not very many coaches would choose Texas Tech over UNLV. They got pretty lucky imo.

 

[Big Old Booger]

Its obviously a downgrade from Tubby but they didn't really have a choice. However, they are getting someone who wants to be there and is willing to leave UNLV to come there. Not very many coaches would choose Texas Tech over UNLV. They got pretty lucky imo.

I fail to see how UNLV is a better job?

The link I found: http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

It's from 2013/14 so a few years old.

On this list, Texas Tech is the 36th largest revenue school with total revenues of $76 million. 5% of their AD is subsidized thru I guess items like student fees and such.

OTOH, UNLV is 62nd with revenues of $44 million but 44% of theirs is subsidized.

Not to mention, Tech is a power 5 program in a much better conference with Texas recruiting available.

 

[bgrch1350]

I fail to see how UNLV is a better job?

The link I found: http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

It's from 2013/14 so a few years old.

On this list, Texas Tech is the 36th largest revenue school with total revenues of $76 million. 5% of their AD is subsidized thru I guess items like student fees and such.

OTOH, UNLV is 62nd with revenues of $44 million but 44% of theirs is subsidized.

Not to mention, Tech is a power 5 program in a much better conference with Texas recruiting available.

UNLV has been good in the past. Tech has really never had any success in the big 12. They've had some good seasons but never consistently. Ones in Vegas and the other is in Lubbock. UNLV has had several 5 star recruits where Tech struggles to get 4 star recruits.

 

[skyvue]

UNLV has been good in the past. Tech has really never had any success in the big 12. They've had some good seasons but never consistently. Ones in Vegas and the other is in Lubbock. UNLV has had several 5 star recruits where Tech struggles to get 4 star recruits.

Phew, that was close! I was afraid you were going to finish that post without mentioning recruiting rankings!

But now that I think of it, I should have never doubted you. My apologies.

 

[soonerdanny]

UNLV is a better job than Texas Tech.

UNLV can draw better talent, but they're not willing to pay much for coaches these days. Their regents had a public slap-fight with their president and AD over Beard's contract. Tech's paying him twice as much.

 

[soonerdanny]

I know that. And Beard should've known that when he took the job. If he takes the Tech job, how could he not expect negative recruiting to greet him at every turn? How could he be trusted?

Meh, I don't think it will get much traction. He can point to the fact that he previously spent a decade at Tech and has regarded it as one of his dream jobs, that this will get him near to his children, and he can claim that things were more rotten at UNLV than he was led to believe, regardless of whether that's true.

 

[SilliSooner]

UNLV has been good in the past. Tech has really never had any success in the big 12. They've had some good seasons but never consistently. Ones in Vegas and the other is in Lubbock. UNLV has had several 5 star recruits where Tech struggles to get 4 star recruits.

The above statement might prove once and for all that recruitment of high ranking players does not always guarantee success. UNLV had three or four 5-star recruits with little success. Similarly, UCLA is another example.

 

[bgrch1350]

The above statement might prove once and for all that recruitment of high ranking players does not always guarantee success. UNLV had three or four 5-star recruits with little success. Similarly, UCLA is another example.

No one ever says it guarantees success. Getting a 5 star does not mean you are going to win. You look at whose winning championships and they have 4 and 5 star recruits on their team. Villanova didn't win their conference tournament. But who did? Seton Hall and a 5 star recruit, whitehead.

You can have success without a team of 4 and 5 star recruits, but championships as of right now are being won by having some of those recruits on their teams. So until that changes, I won't stop wanting some on our team.

You might hold off on your ucla comment. They are going to be really good next year.

 

[NickZepp]

You gotta get talent to fit a roster. Capel only seemed to try and recruit high recruits and when we missed we had to scramble to get fits and it didn't always work because he never really built a base to recruit to in this region. Star ratings are only for fans to look at and really mean jack squat.

 

[Big Old Booger]

No one ever says it guarantees success. Getting a 5 star does not mean you are going to win. You look at whose winning championships and they have 4 and 5 star recruits on their team. Villanova didn't win their conference tournament. But who did? Seton Hall and a 5 star recruit, whitehead.

You can have success without a team of 4 and 5 star recruits, but championships as of right now are being won by having some of those recruits on their teams. So until that changes, I won't stop wanting some on our team.

You might hold off on your ucla comment. They are going to be really good next year.

KU fans, at least the ones I know here in KC, will tell you the downfall of their March success has been chasing the "one and done" players, which are all 5 stars.

I don't disagree getting a 5 star helps but sometimes you can't find a replacement for a 4th or 5th year senior who was a 3 star but blossomed into a very good college player. Those guys are needed as much if not more than a 5 star.