untjim1995

I have the same problem at work, too. Very annoying

Why wouldn't you want Kragthorpe back here? He owuld immediately be the best head coach we have hired here, experience wise, since Fry. Plus, he is used to recruiting heavily in Texas and Oklahoma, which kinda helps since we are North texas. Count me on the other end of that argument--if Kragthorpe could have been hired here or can be hired here next year, we should do it.

Especially at Vandy

It won't be the NCAA's decision if the Big BCS schools (The Top 50-60) up and leave the NCAA behind. In other words, they form their own cooridnating governance. Then the biggest schools, with the largest fanbases and most journalists-graduates in America covering them become the big leagues--in both football and basketball. Then the networks create playoffs for both of them and those 50-60 teams only have to share the billions amongst themsleves, while the other schools, which had the NCAA Tournament to share in fairly equitably with the BCS conferences and got a share of BCS football money, then lose that, too. That is the fallout from pushing too hard against this. Its also why I don't think that a full-blown playoff that features 13 conferences will ever pass muster with the power-brokers in college athletics.

I, too, must both apologize to RV and congratulate RV because I really believed that it wasn't going to happen when money seemed to be the hurdle, but I give all credit to RV for getting this done. Very impresseive!! My negativity yesterday about $$$ stopping this deal was wrong and I am thankful to be able to "eat my crow" (figuratively, FFR) on this hire!!

$omething tell$ me that Canale$ i$n't gonna be here. Anyone have any gue$$e$ a$ to why?

Emmitt and KRAM1, First off, you are both great fans, which we badly need here. But you know, instead of this either/or argument that you both ALWAYS get into on this board, both of you could actually try something constructive and actually understand where the other is coming from in terms of each's view of UNT. I know that isn't necessarily what a message board is supposed to be about, but really you both could really do alot of good by finding common ground or just stop complaining about how "wrong" the other poster is in every thread you both post about. For example, Emmitt is right in that there should be accountability to everyone associated with the university, especially the AD. Also, KRAM is right in that we need to BADLY support the university both monetarily and in attendance, no matter who the AD or HFC is right now. Its ok to disagree, but to always try and one-up the other guy by telling the rest of us how much more correct you are is a beating. We don't need to continuously be bashed over the head about "priorities" and "head-in-the-sand" references. It works about as well as the current political state in this country--nothing ever improves, but we all get to hear how much dumber the other guy is versus me. Not very effective. untjim

I love it one of the few fans we have comes on here after a great win at home over a really good team in our conference and tells us all how we have lowered expectations and that one of the best programs in the SBC really isn't that great. All I know is that if we don't beat WKU on the road, since they are basically the same as we are, JJ needs to fired on the spot. Don't even let him on the bus back to the airport. RAISE EXPECTATIONS!!!!

Folks make fun of us because the number of people who actually care about UNT Athletics probably makes up less than 1% of all former students, current students, faculty, residents of Denton, and just local sports fans in the Metroplex. Just because the woman who composed the fight song of the university grew to dislike her work later in life is not something people on The Ticket, over on the Hilltop, out in West Texas, or anywhere else will make fun of us for. They will, however, continue to laugh at us as we go 2-10 on the football field because we cannot pay for anything more than a HS coach or when they see that we are playing conference games against with teams known as Florida International and Western Kentucky while Tech plays against Texas or OU and SMU is playing Houston or Southern Miss. They also laugh at a school with 32,000+ students that plays in a toilet of a stadium, and when they finally replace it, the plan to replace it is SMALLER than said toilet. I am not sure what the alumni association could do to protect any traditions from changing, especially when the university itself changes the color and mascot of the school every three years or so. There are many things that we get made fun of for, as I mentioned earlier. As far as the composer of the alma mater not being thrilled with her work later in life, that will rank somewhere around #148 on the list for things to laugh at UNT for. As a matter of fact, I openly ask any and all non-UNT fans to make fun of my alma mater for this. Please, seriously, do this. Whatever you do, though, please don't mention football.

Well, according to reports from College Station, their AD is $16Million in the red. They guaranteed 7 years for Sherman, so a full buyout of 4 years would be necessary if he was fired at the end of the year. Of course, Franchione is still on their payroll for another year, I believe, so that might change things, too, once he has been paid off fully. Most Ags have told me that Sherman will be in College Station for at least the next two years because the buyout is so steep. Apparently, years of losing will even beat down the wealthiest of fanbases, too. The guarantee for Sherman at 7 years was apparently a back-door deal that circumvented the AD by Mike McKinney, who is the current chairman of the Aggie system, and Governonr Rick Perry. Many Aggies are not fond of this at all, especially since it seems that Sherman is not exactly lighting it up in College Station.

Best Thread of All-time? Anyone else agree....(crickets)...Anyone? For a second, I thought I was on the UNT Football forum, but I must have been wrong.

Well, we could stop playing SEC and Big XII South schools. I always think we should play the Big Ten or the ACC like we have plans to do anyway with Clemson and Iowa. Not that we can compete with them, but hopefully the beatings won't be so severe. Iowa almost got beat by Arkansas State this year at home, but I do realize we aren't anywhere near being competitive like that with a good team. Who knows, maybe we can compete with the other SBC teams next year?

My opinion is that we got those big crowds this year--early, not counting Army, which would draw well for UNT no matter what--because of the buzz of having Riley Dodge at QB running Dad's offense. That buzz will probably not be there unless we do win. But, to the bigger point, and you more than most already know this, is that UNT's student body an dlumni base overwhelmingly act apathetic to the school's athletic teams. That is my point. And, yes, IMO, that is bigger than Dr. Bataille, Dr. Pohl, Dr. Hurley, RV, Craig Helwig, Steve Sloan, Fred McCain, TD, Dickey, Simon, Parker, Nelson, Bob Tyler, Jerry Moore, and Hayden Fry combined. I do agree with you about the no excuses thing--I really do, but I also believe that message has been reiterated to Todd Dodge this year by RV for 2010.

I don't know about this. UNT alumni and students, for the most part, don't care at all about UNT Athletics, especially football. I am thrilled to death that the vote for a new stadium passed by the student body, but I truly believe that if even half the student body voted, there would be no stadium. Hell, I am not so sure that if a vote came up on a referenedum to keep football here and that election was well covered and publicized, we would even have a reason to follow the football team. Yes, we have made major strides recently, but we are coming from almost nothing to where we are now, which is being thrilled when we have 20K+ show up for a game, even though our student body and alumni base has been huge for decades. That isn't RV's fault or Dr. Bataille's fault. You can say that if we had a real college coach that things would change, but would they for sure? I mean Hayden Fry left because support was poor. Dickey had a little success, but we never drew big crowds that galvanized the university or the city. Dodge's crowds have been big, but I think its been because of his SLC pedigree and that shine has certainly worn off. You talk about taking football seriously here, but the city has never backed this program at all, most students only become interested when we play someone they know, and the alumni are extremely disconnected. If Dr. B comes out and says our football program is going to be priority #1, I think she knows that the community that is UNT would not be happy. Denton likes its sleepy little arts/music college town scene. Most students are way more interested in UT, A&M, OU, or Tech. The alumni have give never given back to athletics, in part, because the university wouldn't even let the AD have access to its top donors. You tell me how to take athletics/football more seriously when the history of the school and city OVERWHELMINGLY says to do the opposite. There is no doubt in my mind that all of this is bigger than Dr. B, RV, Dodge, etc.. The only silver lining is that new stadium might be a dawn of a new day at UNT, but only if the university decides to pay for that program (take it more seriously). But, history isn't on my side in thinking that things might get better.

I have been gone since the 30th, so I went back and read the posts since I left. The entertainment level was very high, to say the least. 1.) K-State changes weekend for game in Denton. To emmitt and stebo, you couldn't be more right about this situation. K-State was very vocal in wanting out of this game. By leveraging the buyout of the contract versus scheduling the game for their benefit, K-State got what they wanted. For those of you that are just astonished that Kansas State could have that much power, remember that they are part of the haves--us, not so much. We take what we can get--and even if attendance is down because of the weekend after Turkey Day, the game will still draw better than any other 2010 home opponent would draw on that weekend. As a matter of fact, I would bet RV looked at the figures and realized that hosting this game would make more for the AD than the buyout and then hosting a FCS school at any time of the year. However, anyone predicting a win against K-State, much less a close game, is probably in for a letdown. 2.) Leach got fired--Yes, the James family looks extremely weak here, but it is obvious that Tech used them to get what they wanted. Leach may get what he wants out of the deal financially, but he won't get a progarm like this again, IMO. For one, his interview skills are terrible. He interviewed for Miami, but lost to a guy who has never been a head coach--Randy Shannon. He interviewed for Washington, but lost to a guy who has never been a head coach--Steve Sarkisian. I know that he was also mentioned before in connection with job openings at UCLA and Auburn, but neither took him seriously. Leach is a great offensive coach, but he wants nothing to do with fund-raising or glad-handing with big donors. Maybe that changes, but this guy's ego is so large that I suspect he will be out of coaching for a while. Secondly, the times have changed--the wussification of America continues strong, especially at colleges. A guy who has been branded as being "too tough" on players, probably won't play at a BCS school, at least not for the salary he was used to at Tech. Right now, most of what has come out in the media has been favorable to Leach, but more releases of affidavits from the university regarding this deal and any others will probably knock his reputation down even more. Parents of kids today are different--just as Pat Knight said, while comparing himself to his dad, "Today's kids are used to timeout, not spankings". He couldn't be more right. 3.) Troy oversigns, not fair. If we cannot get the conference to step up and put an end to this, then we have two choices: 1.) Move to another conference which doesn't allow this practice, meaning the academic standards of UNT mean something to that conference, unlike the SBC, or 2.) Shut up about it and find our own loophole. TFLF and I don't usually see eye-to-eye here, but this is more about having a quality coach and program to compete against the Troys of the world, which is not exactly like asking us to compete with the rest of the Big XII like Baylor has to do. Seriously, if this is wrong, and I think it is, then the conference or the NCAA will settle it. If they don't, then you really need to ask yourself if UNT needs to be affiliated with such a conference or if it should even be playing at this level. Crying about it while doing NOTHING is sooo very North Texas, but it gets you a program that is 5-31 over three years, yet cannot afford to change coaches. There was more, but this all made me laugh. Seriously, good job GMG.com--the entertainment this board provides me each day is very high.

Am I the only one out there that thinks this is just sweet justice to a guy that seemed like an a jerk and a class of fans that are were voted EASILY as the worst fans in the Big XII? The next closest "worst fanbase" was like half of what Tech got, according to that SI poll from a few weeks ago. And Leach may have seemed "witty" to a lot of people, but he seemed more like an arrogant SOB to me. To me, this is a sweet day. I just can't stand them. From goalpost taunting to rushing the field BEFORE a game is over, their fanbase just seems really dumb--maybe that's why they are always called Tards on other boards.

I disagree with this big-time. If JJ gets back to another NCAA tournament, he won't need to win a game to get consideration for a move up. Heck, most of the time we would be a high double-digit seed, so you play a big-time team usually in the first round. In reality, I think another school will look at JJ and see what he has built over the years at UNT with a great facility, but with absolutely pitiful attendance and will gladly offer him a contract ith the thought being that he can build a program from scratch and with more support and $$, he could be a great coach for their school for a long time.

Good post--I just look at the fact that SMU went out and PAID for a top coach AND staff to come to the Hilltop as the reason they have seen the turnaround that they have enjoyed. In a jaded way, you could argue that SMU just went and bought coaches this time versus buying players like they did in the 80s, but I believe that SMU has finally figured out the right course of action. IMO, the two ways you improve your program are to find an eager young coach who you believe is ready for the next step up (i.e. Sumlin at UH, Kragthorpe at Tulsa, or Briles when UH hired him) or you go out and get a real coach who has skins on the wall--Fry at UNT, Fran at TCU, Jones at SMU, Price at UTEP, etc.. To me, the latter usually has proven to work at a non-BCS school faster than the former way. We did it before, albeit 35+ years ago, but the price of poker has changed. No one can expect us to match SMU's or TCU's pockets, but our administration really needs to ask itself if the university wants to succeed at football on a non-BCS Division-1 level. Having a smaller stadium than any other school in Texas isn't going to send that message, nor is keeping around a coach who doesn't go to a bowl game in his 4th year after going 5-31 just because it is cheaper than buying out the contract. In all seriousness, if we cannot find a way ADMINISTRATIVELY to fund this thing at a higher level than what we are even looking at after the student fee goes into effect, I just wonder how much different the next 15 years will be from the past 15 years. If we cannot afford to pay for a good coach and his staff, then we don't need to talk about competing with the non-AQ teams in Texas or around the region, much less talk about leaving the SBC because its not good enough.

Ok, I agree that those 4 private schools are not going to be able to add a 5th to their conference. No way any other private school is leaving voluntarily from where they are. So, lets play the assumption game that CUSA gets raided in this manner--the Big Ten takes Pitt or Rutgers, which makes the Big East choose someone, lets say its Memphis, since they fit their conference perfectly, or Central Florida because they can be a travel partner to USF and are in Florida. Then CUSA has to fill that void of one team. Well, the Eastern teams are still Memphis or UCF, Marshall, ECU, USM, and UAB. The West is Tulane, SMU, Tulsa, Rice, UH, and UTEP. Now if those 4 private schools are going to vote together, wouldn't you also assume that they have some pull with the other schools, particularly to the East where they just lost a school in one of their two big markets (Tennessee or Florida)? Usually, the votes for admission into a new conference require a strong majority, not 6-5. In my scenario, if I were MTSU or FAU right now, I would like my chances A LOT!! If I was a western-oriented public school in a market that already had a school who has a strong history, sits in the middle of the media center of that market, and oh by the way, has more money then God, sitting there saying to their buddies, "Uhh, I don't think they fit with us.", I think that would have a lot of pull. It certainly has for a long time, which is exemplified by SMU backing podunk-market LA Tech for CUSA admission over a school with a tad more potential up the road. IMO, our road to significance isn't going to be in CUSA--unless SMU leaves. Pray that TCU stops looking down their noses long enough at SMU right now to consider them for admission into an expanded MWC. Then we are the perfect fit for CUSA. Otherwise, I think its in the SBC with our current bunkmates for at least the next 10 years or splintering off with some of the western SBC and joining a WAC that has a strong Eastern Division. BTW, I think the SBC with our current bunkmates minus a MTSU or FAU, but adding USA and eventually UTSA or Texas State, would probably be ok, especially since I believe the MWC/PAC-10 will eventually raid the Western WAC heavyweights at some point. I guess the other possibility in all of this is that we got our stuff together in the next five years in both football and men's hoops (multiple bowls and tourney appearances), see stronger attendance, and the MWC asked TCU to take us on as a travel partner and that was agreed upon by the Frogs. Other than a BCS invite or a new SWC being formed, the best possible alternative would be this scenario.

I just can't see a scenario at play ever where we are in the same conference as SMU. I just don't think that will ever happen. I think the private schools in this scenario are always going to vote together to protect their own interests--SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, and Rice.

I believe that the Big 10 has much better TV contracts than the Big 12. Plus, Iowa has many traditional rivals in the Big 10.

My dream scenario would be something like that happening--UNT gets into the Big XII. The ONLY way that would happen, though, is for the two bell-weather Texas schools that are joined at the hip (UT and A&M) to join the SEC. This scenario plays out if the following occurred--the Big 10 takes Mizzou, and the Pac-10 took Colorado, which then starts the domino rolling fast. The Big XII looks at who to replace them with and go to Memphis, Utah, BYU, and UNT to fill out the remainder of the equation. They take UNT over TCU because of UNT's size and potential and both Tech and Baylor block TCU (both hate TCU now). Then out of nowhere, UNT plays in a south division that looks like this: UNT, Memphis, OSU, OU, Tech, Baylor and the North is BYU, Utah, K-State, KU, Nebraska, and Iowa State. Meanwhile, the MWC loses its two flagship teams, so they add Boise State and Fresno State--which pisses TCU off, so they join CUSA to replace Memphis. The WAC decides that La Tech is out of their footprint at this point, so they get the Montana schools to agree to move up to replace BSU and FSU, while La Tech is forced to take UNT's spot in the SBC. Again, folks, its just a dream...

It depends--if its just Mizzou, then I think they try for Arkansas, but if that fails (which it would), they would probably go with Memphis. If both Mizzou and Colorado were to leave--CU to the Pac-10 has been bandied about--then I believe they will get Utah and BYU. Apparently, BYU and Utah are tied at the hip, even though one is private and one is public. I know the Big XII has trademarked the Big XIV, so that has to be considered, too, but I believe that those will be the targets.

Which is why SMU, Houston, and UTEP probably have no interest in having us in a conference with them--it works the same way.

I thought this was a good article form the WSJ about UT and its support. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405...Tabs%3Dcomments