Hell, Lovie Smith was a Super Bowl caliber HC, and he completely flopped in the same job at Illinois.
There are never any guarantees.
But the LOWER risk, comparatively speaking, is hiring a coach with recent title level HC experience in a top half D1 conference over a coach with NO HC experience, and as such, UNPROVEN in that role, and that no one else, including any SLC team, has seen fit to make a HC.
In the end, we took the comparatively lower risk.
We’ll see how it plays out.
He’s entitled to one regulation “freebie” sucky first season, just as Fritz and Sampson were.
Bregman knows him personally and was coached by him. Pretty sure that means he knows Davis better than anyone on this board would that can’t claim the same.
And you’d be a fool to think that anyone that hasn’t done so knows baseball better than someone that has played it at the highest level, as Bregman has, and even at an MLB all-star level.
So based on both of those FACTS…I REJECT any assertion of yours to the contrary.
If you can’t get your point across in 100+ posts on the subject matter, and have to keep repeating yourself for 3 days, then you aren’t very good at convincing a jury of your peers (this forum).
Let someone else be candid in their responses to MY questions, and try making a counter argument to the FACTS I just mentioned.
As for you…
Try to make a better argument as to how ANYONE here would know Davis better than Bregman, who knew him personally and was coached by him, or would know baseball itself better than a MLB All-Star like Bregman.
Seeing none…my counter-motion for summary judgment in this case is GRANTED.
Case closed.
NEXT!!!
Bultokid
("I've Done More With Less, My Whole Life")
28
I don’t expect to go dancing next year just improvement and headed in right direction and I’ll be happy. We’ll know for sure in 2028/2029…hoping to raise a toast and contribute to the statue fund
If the case is truly closed, why are you still trying to convince the forum that you have a case and a valid argument? You must suck at your job.
Have confidence in your work and let your arguments speak for themselves; they shouldn’t have to be repeated ad nauseum. Bregman is not an evaluator of college coaches. How many college coaches did he play for? A handful, several, many? Does he know the Texas high school talent pool? Does he know the relationships that Davis has with Texas high school coaches? Does he, Bregman, even know ANY Texas high school baseball players? Does Bregman know the opinions of high school players and their families, and if they trust Davis to build their player and succeed as a college head coach? Do you or Bregman know any of these answers? The jury is still out; the case isn’t closed while the jury is in deliberation.
Your case that Bregman, is some omniscient soothsayer is a non-sequitur.
Case delayed while the jury is out.
Next.
4 Likes
Bultokid
("I've Done More With Less, My Whole Life")
32
If there’s no improvement in 2027 then we hired the wrong guy
Because you made a motion against me and re-opened the case.
That meant I had a lawyerly duty to make a counter-motion and argument.
Sometimes…it’s better just to let me have the last word.
And if you’d prefer not to…then make a better counter-argument than you have.
And no.
No one ON THIS BOARD knows Davis better than Bregman. PERIOD. FULL STOP.
As for Bregman, I suspect he had more than one assistant coach at LSU besides Davis. In any event, Bregman would be more familiar with his coaching talent than anyone here on that very basis. PERIOD. FULL STOP.
THOSE were the issues before this court.
As for Bregman knowing local baseball talent, that wasn’t the issue. Not sure why YOU are making it one, because it seems a bit irrelevant.
As for Davis knowing local baseball talent, again, I’ve looked at his roster at Lamar; he has mostly players from the Greater Houston and greater Golden Triangle areas.
Those are…BTW…the two areas that WE recruit most heavily, so I’m not worried about HIS knowledge of our preferred recruiting region. Could care less about Bregman’s knowledge.
Davis obviously has it…and has signed enough of it to win a conference title and make the NCAAs with it.
The jury will get back to you with their decision, standby. There’s a corner for you in the courtroom for you to sit while deliberations are proceeding. The hat on the stool with DUNCE written on it is for you. We’ll tap you when we have our verdict.
Meanwhile, you can keep your own dunce cap on…sitting way in the back in the cheap seats!
And again…make an argument that someone ON THIS BOARD knows Davis better than someone that has been coached by him, or knows baseball better more generally than a MLB all-star at the game.
Until you do…the weight of evidence is against you on BOTH of the issues before this court.
We didn’t significantly improve in either Sampson or Fritz’ first seasons, respectively.
That does NOT mean that we hired the wrong guy. In both cases, we hired the RIGHT guy, and the proof that is the improvement we saw in their SECOND seasons as HC, because, as I said, EVERY new HC is allowed ONE regulation “freebie” sucky first season.
See Fritz and Sampson for evidence precisely to that effect.
Davis will be allowed his, just as Fritz and Sampson were.
Again, if we don’t see significant improvement in Davis’ SECOND season, then it’ll be a better indication to the effect that you described.
The argument is that Bregman has no standing in this case as a talent evaluator; he’s a character witness, and that is duly noted as someone who knows Davis. You’re attempt to sway the jury with nothing more than a character witness has failed. All potatoes and no meat, all hat and no cattle. If there are no more witnesses then you can rest your case. You’ve beaten this dead horse and the judge has ordered you to move on and quit wasting the court’s time.
The jury is out for deliberation for 24 months, stay tuned.
But you’ve provided NO evidence to the contrary on either issue, or even a decent argument against it, which means that I automatically win on the weight of the evidence.
Weak evidence (which is debatable; I’d say it’s pretty strong) wins over NO evidence to the contrary (which is what you have).
This isn’t a criminal case, so it’s not beyond a reasonable doubt, and given that it’s not a criminal case, where the burden of proof never shifts to the other side, it’s all about weight of evidence on each side.
This is, at best, a preponderance of the evidence case, and I’ve met my burden of coming forward with evidence through the testimony of an expert witness.
You’ve provided NOTHING to the contrary, evidence wise, or even a decent counter argument, so you’ve failed to meet the burden that has now shifted to you.
