DRC commentary: The big news is UNT's commitment to basketball

[UNTFan23]

1 minute ago, Army of Dad said:

No, since the discussion was based on their resumes when hired to coach football at UNT.

If SL takes us to more bowl games and leaves us in a better position when he leaves, SL > DM. It's debateable whether DM truly had a better resume as he ended up getting fired. It would be better to compare the two when SL leaves for whatever reason. If things keep improving, he'll be hired away by someone.

[GrandGreen]

1 hour ago, Army of Dad said:

Spell check, that wasn't a shot, sorry if you took it that way.

I see the issue as being more deep seated than whomever is sitting in the AD chair at any given time. 

This whole thing seems to be a 'glass half full/empty' kind of discussion. Some people want to believe that this time it's really going to be different. I heard similar things (and said some of them) in the past. I'm on the glass half empty side of this equation at the moment. By it's very nature GMG has a higher percentage of half full/believers.

Sorry, didn't think the spellcheck reference was a shot, but it is a pet peeve of mine for people to point out minor errors in posts instead of responding to the obvious message.

I don't think it has anything to do with your viewpoint, half or full analogy.    The investment in athletics is definitely on an upward swing and it is obvious to me that the doing "just enough to stay around" in Division I has ended.    Again that doesn't guarantee success, but it does definitely improve the odds.   

It seems to me, that you and others are looking more at the past than the future.  NT is not likely to erase decades of minimal support and extremely bad decisions in athletics overnight.  NT is at the bottom of G5 football and basketball and the only way is up, sideways, or just quit.  

NT has never hired a current div 1 hc in either football or MBB before now.   I rather focus on that factor, than whether Baker fired Benford before or after his contract was up.   

 

[forevereagle]

9 minutes ago, Army of Dad said:

No, since the discussion was based on their resumes when hired to coach football at UNT.

SL didn't have a losing record as a HC before being hired here and was a coordinator and not a position coach. Not saying that he had the better resume, but he didn't have some of the red flags.

[UNTFan23]

3 minutes ago, Cerebus said:

I was one that wanted TB gone ASAP because I thought him staying was bad messaging to the fan base.  I still think letting him finish out the year was a mistake.  However, the hiring of GM has really impressed me.  

• We hired away a successful coach from an FBS institution.  When was the last time this happened in a revenue sport?  Even Hayden Fry was fired at SMU before he came here.  
• We paid a large buyout to get a coach we wanted.  Again, have we ever done this before?
• As others have pointed out, our PREVIOUS hires in MBB and CFB where seen as bigger than ever before, swing for the fences types of hires.  They both flopped.  In the past, this would have met with incredible pressure from on campus to cut spending.  Instead, the president is allowing the AD to go even higher.

I raised my giving when the new AD was hired.  I will do so again  after this.  President Smatresk needs to see that his increased spending on Athletics will result in increased fundraising and engagement.  I encourage you to give, at what ever level you are able to do so.

I've seen tweets where people are buying season tickets for 2017-18 because of the hire. People can complain that Benford wasn't dismissed soon all they wanted, but it's the hire that will buy more capital from a fanbase eager for change. I don't recall seeing people committing to buying season tickets for the next season the instance Benford was fired, just promising to go to games once he was gone to show support for the team.

I'm sure there are more instances like this.

[KingDL1]

14 minutes ago, UNTFan23 said:

If SL takes us to more bowl games and leaves us in a better position when he leaves, SL > DM. It's debateable whether DM truly had a better resume as he ended up getting fired. It would be better to compare the two when SL leaves for whatever reason. If things keep improving, he'll be hired away by someone.

What?  It does not matter what happened here, it is what their resumes were before these coaches stepped foot at UNT. DMac was a savior at Iowa State as a head coach, he was brought up as an assistant under Hayden Fry. 

What each coach  accomplishes here is a different question.

[UNTFan23]

Just now, KingDL1 said:

What?  It does not matter what happened here, it what their resumes were before these coach stepped foot at UNT. DMac was a savior at Iowa State as a head coach, was a brought up as an assistant under Hayden Fry. 

What each coach  accomplishes here is a different question.

Whatever. Odds are excellent there were better choices out there than Coach Mac. He's what we felt was the most safe hire at the time because we could check off the most boxes with him (previous HC experience if you ignore his overall record at ISU, Fry coaching tree, he's touched a national championship ring, etc).

[KingDL1]

1 minute ago, UNTFan23 said:

Whatever. Odds are excellent there were better choices out there than Coach Mac. He's what we felt was the most safe hire at the time because we could check off the most boxes with him (previous HC experience if you ignore his overall record at ISU, Fry coaching tree, he's touched a national championship ring, etc).

Not sure what you are saying, odds are excellent there is always better choices out there in someones opinion, whoever we choose.  

[Army of Dad]

17 hours ago, Cerebus said:

We hired away a successful coach from an FBS institution.  When was the last time this happened in a revenue sport?  Even Hayden Fry was fired at SMU before he came here.  

Karen Ast-oh dang, you said from a FBS so your point stands. 

Well played.

17 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

Sorry, didn't think the spellcheck reference was a shot, but it is a pet peeve of mine for people to point out minor errors in posts instead of responding to the obvious message.

I only stated it in this instance since WB cited well being of student athletes in his "I waited to act on Benford comments". I thought I knew your meaning, but wanted to make sure.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Army of Dad

[Cerebus]

4 minutes ago, Army of Dad said:

Karen Ast-oh dang, you said from a FBS so your point stands.

I also said revenue sport.  

[UNTFan23]

2 minutes ago, KingDL1 said:

Not sure what you are saying, odds are excellent there is always better choices out there in someones opinion, whoever we choose.  

If you're looking to check off boxes then DM was an "OK" hire. If you want to go off of intangibles I don't feel DM is the guy you want. Like I said, DM was a safe hire if all you were concerned with was checking off boxes on a list.

[Army of Dad]

42 minutes ago, UNTFan23 said:

If SL takes us to more bowl games and leaves us in a better position when he leaves, SL > DM. It's debateable whether DM truly had a better resume as he ended up getting fired. It would be better to compare the two when SL leaves for whatever reason. If things keep improving, he'll be hired away by someone.

I fail to see how that would change their resumes when they were hired to be a head football coach here.

1 minute ago, Cerebus said:

I also said revenue sport.  

What is the meaning of 'is'?

WBB is often grouped into that category here. Surely there is some revenue (not profit, but that's not likely to be the case for MBB or football either) so it could be called a revenue sport. ?

[Cerebus]

5 minutes ago, Army of Dad said:

WBB is often grouped into that category here. Surely there is some revenue (not profit, but that's not likely to be the case for MBB or football either) so it could be called a revenue sport. ?

Yeah I get it's a hazy, very hazy, definition.  When I talk to administrators "revenue sports" is usually a shorthand for CFB and MBB.  

 

[TreeFiddy]

[GreenMachine]

3 hours ago, Army of Dad said:

How can you say it's different? I believe Benford's pay was at or near the top of the Belt and was near the top of CUSA. How is having a new coach's pay near the top of the conference a different approach?

About the only difference is that the new coach was a D1 head coach when he was hired here.

That's not the only difference, at all. He was a winning coach everywhere he went. We have identified many problems that existed that we, the fan, never knew about. We are close, hopefully, to adding an IPF. Raising the coaches pay now more influences the type of coaches we can obtain in the future. This AD is night and day different than it was last year ago and you know it. Just because someone in particular is on a temporary ban doesn't mean you have to jump in and take his place for all things negative.

[Wag Tag]

1 hour ago, Army of Dad said:

Canning Benford before allowing him to coach out every season on his contract and making an apparently good hire are not mutually exclusive things. 

I'd argue that canning Benford earlier both makes a statement to your customers and gets you in position to act quickly if the right candidate is available. WB moved quickly to hire his choice, but missed the opportunity to send a statement. I don't think his true believers would have been peeved at him if he fired Benford sooner so he could have gotten more out of the process and not lost the support he still has.

As stated by WB.. it is very detrimental on the student athlete both in and out of the classroom. What statement we sucked! We all know LSU should of fired JJ mid season but that is ok because it is a football school. Benford never complained and still worked hard as proven by his current commits. Wish him the best!

[TreeFiddy]

Collectively, things seem different.  Different president, that takes an active interest in the hiring process.  Different AD and assistant AD that both have basketball backgrounds. Plus the additional things already mentioned like current D1 coach, prior head coaching experience, grew up in the area.

Still, there are no guarantees.  He could flop miserably.  Eventually, if we continue providing the proper resources and keep hiring people with the right background, we will eventually succeed or go broke trying.  No different than any other program that is spending what it takes to field a competitive team.

 

[Army of Dad]

26 minutes ago, GreenMachine said:

Just because someone in particular is on a temporary ban doesn't mean you have to jump in and take his place for all things negative.

Who's been given a vacation from GMG?

Again, I've seen the 'this time it really is different' spiel before. If you choose to believe that this time, finally, it will all work out then that's fine. I'm far more skeptical and history would indicate that is more often correct.

Shoot, maybe UNT really will finally figure it out, but most of the arguments presented are just people choosing to believe it's different this time. The hiring of a sitting D1 coach is different, trying to catch up on facilities isn't. Being near the top of a conference in terms of coaching pay isn't different. Will these coaches and this AD work out? Maybe, maybe not (though I think McCasland has a better than even chance of working out).

[BTG_Fan1]

5 hours ago, Army of Dad said:

Disagree. SL did not have a better resume.

eta: How does giving SL a new contract "address problems on the football side"?

Football is a young man game now, with a few coaches like Saban and Bill Synder upon others I'm sure...

But with SL history of turning around offenses and the ability to score points would lead me to pick him over a much older, smash-mouth coach... 

[greenminer]

52 minutes ago, Army of Dad said:

Who's been given a vacation from GMG?

Again, I've seen the 'this time it really is different' spiel before. If you choose to believe that this time, finally, it will all work out then that's fine. I'm far more skeptical and history would indicate that is more often correct.

Shoot, maybe UNT really will finally figure it out, but most of the arguments presented are just people choosing to believe it's different this time. The hiring of a sitting D1 coach is different, trying to catch up on facilities isn't. Being near the top of a conference in terms of coaching pay isn't different. Will these coaches and this AD work out? Maybe, maybe not (though I think McCasland has a better than even chance of working out).

I've been around probably as long or longer than you, and I think the spending that has been happening across the AD has been enough to suggest things are changing for the better.  There seems to be a sense of commitment going way above the Athletic Director that was not there during RV's reign.

Whereas, before, a single splash hire such as Dodge, or a single bowl win in the Mac era gave us an illusion for hope, in retrospect it's easy to see why those were one-offs and for the most part ol'-UNT was going to continue sub par.  Now, the foundation seems be getting laid ($$$) to believe that if something is going wrong, it will not be accepted and will be addressed ASAP.

RV was the consummate salesman and when things started to really go south I could feel he was reaching for the same ol' cliches and grasping at thin air. Wren seems really straightforward and acts like something we have not had: a real Athletic Director directing athletics.

Shit, I could be wrong though.  SL and GM could go < %50 next season and we'll all be scratching our heads and blocking UNT90 again.

[Green P1]

7 hours ago, forevereagle said:

Out of curiosity, which is/would have been the bigger statement, firing Benford mid-season or the hiring of McCasland and the details of that (speed, money, etc.)? Just curious what people think on the matter.

It seems to me that the commitment we are making is the bigger statement about the desired future of the program than a mid-season firing would have been, but that is just my opinion.

I know I would have been much more excited about one had it followed the other.  Now I'd like to be optimistic but I almost don't give a crap. 

Edited March 16, 2017 by Green P1

[KingDL1]

3 hours ago, Army of Dad said:

Who's been given a vacation from GMG?

I was wondering also? 

[Army of Dad]

12 hours ago, BTG_Fan1 said:

Football is a young man game now, with a few coaches like Saban and Bill Synder upon others I'm sure...

But with SL history of turning around offenses and the ability to score points would lead me to pick him over a much older, smash-mouth coach... 

Giving SL a new contract when he had one in place for four more seasons isn't addressing any problems in football, imo.

Other items like increasing recruiting budget and looking to add supplements to the training table are things that address problems/issues/deficiencies. 

[forevereagle]

12 hours ago, Green P1 said:

I know I would have been much more excited about one had it followed the other.  Now I'd like to be optimistic but I almost don't give a crap. 

That's fair. I think the biggest statement of this would be winning and I am hopeful it will be following on soon.

[KingDL1]

1 hour ago, Army of Dad said:

Giving SL a new contract when he had one in place for four more seasons isn't addressing any problems in football, imo.

Other items like increasing recruiting budget and looking to add supplements to the training table are things that address problems/issues/deficiencies. 

I was under the impression that was about fixing the pay structure that was in place for the assistants, and what SL did his first year with his own salary to help increase the pay for the assistants he hired. I heard this a few times but it could be make believe I am not sure. 

[akriesman]

11 hours ago, KingDL1 said:

I was wondering also? 

Well, it would appear a lot of negativity around here left with that individual.    I can certainly make a good guess based on the sudden uptick in the quality of the discussions over the last week or so.