untjim1995

Remember that SMU team was absolutley terrible, too. Yes, the offense was great that night, but that was against a team that only won one game in the entire year, IIRC. And, yes, Troy dominated us that day. Of course, so did winless FIU, too.

I do believe that when the next shift takes place in college football, the big BCS schools will either create a super BCS or separate from the NCAA to set up their own affiliation. I could see some BCS private schools like Baylor, Wake, Vandy, Duke, and Northwestern being relegated down. Big public universities with large enrollments and large alumni bases, along with the private schools like ND, USC, BYU, and Boston College will stay up. It would all look something like this: Western League--USC, UCLA, UA, ASU, WSU, UW, Oregon, Oregon State, Cal, Stanford, BYU, and Utah Midwest League--Texas, Tech, A&M, OU, OSU, Arkansas, KU, K-State, Mizzou, Nebraska, Colorado, Iowa State Southeastern--Miami, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, LSU, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Clemson, South Florida, Tennessee Upper Midwest--Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Louisville, Cincinnati Atlantic Coast--North Carolina, NC State, UVa, Va Tech, WVU, Kentucky, Maryland, Penn State, Pitt, Rutgers, Boston College, Connecticut There are other teams, like UCF, Memphis, Boise State, or Fresno that could also move up in these talks, but you get the idea.

I do think we will have some improvement on the defensive end of the ball. I don't think the offense is going to be much better than it has been. I think Rodge will put up big yardage numbers, but I think it will be because we will have to pass a lot trying to catch up. Plus, he will have growing pains, too. I just haven't seen this offense get to the end zone like I expected it to (sans Navy) against good teams. If the defense and special teams are improved, though, I expect to be able to compete with the bottom-rung teams in the SBC (i.e. FIU, WKU, ULM, etc.) and Army. I think we could be improved significantly as a team this year, but we were just so bad last year that I just can't see more than 3 wins. The real question is if 3 wins would be enough to convince the administration to change coaches. I just don't know if the money is there right now. I can see a scenario where Dodge is the coach through our last year at Fouts, but the university uses the new stadium as a springboard to make a coaching "splash". I guess we'll see.

Funny, that is also what I thought when I saw his name, too. Did you notice that the top two non-AQ BCS coaches were Jones at SMU and Patterson at TCU? Its tough being the poor guy at the party, especially when its in your own backyard. Then again, its nothing new, either.

How many people showed up? How many were expected?

If 32,000 people come out to watch 1-11 SMU play SFA, the economy is doing much better than I thought...

I disagree completely on the championship front. That derailed a great Ball State season last year because of a meaningless championship game. The WAC gets tons more legitimacy for sending teams to BCS games than holding a championship game. Same goes for the MWC. Don't give your undefeated team another chance to get knocked out of the mix. Hell, Boise deserved to be in a BCS game last year over Ohio State, but the computers got them in the end. Another game against Fresno State or La Tech would have hurt them even more if they won because those other WAC teams were not highly rated. And speaking of Ohio State, has there been any team/conference that has benefited more from NOT having a conference championship game than the Big Ten and OSU? They get into three BCS games in a row because they are done playing early while all the other conferences are still beating each other up.

Why? If that was the case, then they shouldn't even cover the athletic department.

I agree, Quoner. I just get fed up with it too.

Your post is the winner here--if someone thinks that we would have beaten A&M during that year, they are high. Our offensive philosphy would have been to run the ball every down and we would have been lucky to score a touchdown against them. Except for the Baylor game in 2003, name the other OOC BCS school we played under Dickey where we scored more than two TDs? Of the top of my head, I cant think of one.

I grew up in FW and watched a lot of bad TCU football for many years in the SWC. Of course, TCU has had lots of advantages for being in FW--they are the town's team and they had amazing success in football from the 30's thru the 50's, so history was on their side. It never hurt, either, that Texas, A&M, Arky, Tech, Baylor, and SMU brought big crowds over there to basically fund their program for years down the road. Their athletic endowment fund is very large (like Rice) and they never had to really compete for fans like UNT has had to forever. Then, of course, TCU gets kicked from the SWC and makes their way pretty well in every conference they have been in since then because they have been able to compete with schools that are much more alike in budget and stature. But being in a conference with schools that you can compete with is key to moving upward. If you cannot compete with SBC schools--and FIU beating us soundly two years in a row tells us this--even moving up to CUSA competition for UNT right now would not be feasible because the conference knows we aren't ready for that level yet, like Troy, MTSU, or FAU are at the moment. Look at TCU--they get into the WAC, hire Fran, beat USC in the Sun Bowl, move up to CUSA. They beat ranked schools and do very well in CUSA and the MWC (the mother of all non-AQ leagues) comes calling. The key is winning--but the lock is money, history, and coaching. TCU has all three, SMU has had all three before, we haven't. Only way we can change this is to win the SBC while playing in a new stadium and enjoying the new athletic fee. If any of those don't happen, we will always be where we are on the food chain.

What makes you think that? The article said both games are to be played up there. I don't understand how you can't get a 2 for 1 with Iowa. ULL and FAU get Minnesota to travel down there as part of their series. MTSU gets Maryland to go to Murfreesboro, but we can't get Iowa to come down here for a game in the hotbed of recruiting and, supposedly, a new stadium will be here. Its stuff like this that makes people wonder why UNT plays football at a D-1 level.

How is it that in the football forum, where the moderator is actually asking us to thank and support the website's sponsors, that THIS would be an appropriate reply? Come on, man. We get that you are liberal--and we know that we are in a free country with free speech, but really? This is what is humorous to about three or four of you on the board. The rest of us, especially after the 4th of July just passed, probably don't think a photoshop of a soldier that committed crimes having a UNT shirt on is respectful of the soldiers or the university. Its just not funny.

I think that what you would find, sadly, is that the big bowl games would fight to keep their tie-ins with the big BCS schools because of TV and media coverage. The reality is that most of the media really make the Boise State victory over OU out as a "miracle" and they always say the ratings are lower for those games vs. a big name bowl game (i.e., UT vs Ohio State). I don't personally know if the ratings are better or worse with a "Cinderella", but we are always told by the media elite that the population wants these big games between the name schools. I don't think the Orange Bowl, Cotton Bowl, Rose Bowl, etc..will ever give up having the big schools in their game. If legislation passed to correct this--ie force the smaller conferences to have access, I bet the bowl organizers would counter-sue in a heartbeat. And, to be honest, I can't blame them--the big schools have used their success to make new fans and alumni, increase interest, and drive the ratings game. Its probably the single biggest disappointment for UNT--if we had cared about athletics at all before the turn of the century, we could have easily been included in this mix. We literally have no one to blame but ourselves--and SMU, of course!!

Think Baylor is hurting? Not only did they receive more payout in BCS money than TCU or Boise did last year, 0-12 Washington received more than either of those two. Again, where is it better to be--bottom of BCS or top of non-BCS? Our hearts say the non-BCS becasue we like the little guy. Our heads know the answer, though. $$$$ talk--it makes it so much easier for a Baylor, when they do get a good coach, to succeed because they know that the resources they get is far better than any of the non-BCS. That is why Briles left UH.

Louisville, came out ok, I think. I mean, they get BCS money for football, they have gone to a BCS bowl game, and they get in one of the most premier hoops leagues for both men and women that produces great revenues. Its somewhat possible that they are just a bit better now than when they were in CUSA. (SARCASM)

I am not a huge fan of TFLF, but doesn't this cross the line on the personal attack?

Something tells me that if Dodge wins at least two games, that he will still be the coach here. Just my opinion, though.

One of the best con-men coaches of all time in my opinion. He could sell ice to Eskimos --he was that charismatic. Couldn't outcoach your below-average YMCA coach for under-6 year olds. Seriously, it was one thing to lose by 75 at Maryland, another to just get absolutely crushed against Big West and SBC teams twice a week. There are many solid comparisons you can make between he and Dodge on the football side of things. Both got alot of excitment generated for their teams and got much imprioved facilities, but the actual team perfromance was much worse than anyone could have dreamed.

1-11 I just can't see us competing yet with any of the teams on the schedule beyond WKU and Army, so I will have UNT split in those two games. Our lines are weak (even if they are supposedly improving) and the QB is fragile and inexperienced (BTW, his backups are inexperienced, too). My gut says neither Todd nor Riley will be here after this year. If, however, UNT was to split its opening 4 games, they could be at 4-5 wins at the end of the year, but, again, I just don't see how us doing that.

Here are my thoughts on a very interesting topic, but involving a Baylor vs. UNT comparison. I know that the comparison is supposed to be with us in the SBC as the role of Baylor, but the view that Baylor should ever move out of the Big XII will never occur becasue of the following listing. Pros for being Baylor: 1. Money--lots of it and its mostly guaranteed. No downside--only gets higher if the Big XII gets two teams in the BCS games or if you make a bowl game and get additional monies from the game. 2. Prestige--Being in a BCS conference alone adds much more credibility than anyone can challenge. For example, everyone at TCU would die to get into a AQ-BCS league that played local schools. As a matter of fact, Baylor made more bowl money last year by being in the BCS than TCU made for beating Boise State and finishing in the Top Ten. That alone still drives me crazy, but it makes the point. 3. Image--Both in the state and in the national media, Baylor gets more attention just because of who they play in conference. Recruits who like a smaller school and can get playing time early would probably feel like Baylor's situation could be a great fit. Cons for being Baylor: 1. Loser Mentality--this description is awfully hard to get rid of. As a matter of fact, their fans are so excited because last year they beat A&M and went 4-8. That's the tough part about playing in the Big XII South every year. 2. Apathy--alumni and administration always have the crutch to lean on and say, "Hey, we can't beat OU, Texas, Nebraska, etc..so it really isn't a big deal if we go 3-9 every year." For obvious reasons, I won't go into the breakdown of being UNT and in the SBC--the Pros are almost non-existent when compared to anyone else in Texas. I would take their place or anyone in CUSA for that matter in a heartbeat. The real question I have is why the non AQ-BCS schools in Texas do not want to be aligned with UNT in a conference still to this day? I understand the past with the SWC, butI just don't get why that view is still in play when UTEP is easily accepted. I just don't get it.

TFLF, Great post--maybe the most accurate post I have read in a long time regarding our cycle of repitition at UNT regarding football. Sometimes, I wonder why this school even keeps football around at this level. So little support--both in dollars and in fanbase--make the old nestor views very difficult to beat. If this stadium gets built by 2012, then I will truly believe that we want to stay at the FBS level. But, if it doesn't, I fear that this program won't be around down the road. I think sometimes we all fool ourselves into believeing that the student body voted for big changes with the stadium vote in the fall, but I think the overwhelming number of people who didn't vote in the election fall more in line with the NO voter than the YES voter. Now, that is not a reason for the fee to be overturned, but it does speak to the fact that the stadium still faces a lot of hurdles before we can get this going. This isn't even considering the fact that fundraising hasn't exactly boomed, either. Tthe only way that this program will ever be anything other than a Bottom 20 Team is if the administration and BOR decide that the "flyer" approach for a head coach is not the way to go, but instead they go out and get a Coach Fry-type guy with skins on the wall. Otherwise, you will continue to get coordinators from non-BCS schools and HS head coaches here at UNT.

I haven't read the contract, so that is interesting to say the least. But will they do it? And what would the pay be? Any thoughts on this?

I do think he has a short list, but I think it is only to use if Dodge resigns or takes a job at another school (i.e., position coach or coordinator) Lets face it--there is just no way that UNT can afford to pay two coaches at the same time (even if Dodge was reassigned). Dodge will get year 4 if he wants it--even if he goes winless. Heck, if some of the reports are true about the topic of paying coaches, we are still paying Dickey some dollars, which is probably why Dodge was the perfect candidate for the athletic department in 2007. My hopes are twofold for 2009: 1.) We end up overacheiving and Dodge stays, which seems close to miraculous at this point (winning 4+ games) or 2.)We only win a game or two and Dodge resigns to go back to HS or go become a position coach at some other college. And, as far as RV losing his job, I have no idea how many years he has left on his contract, but it seems far-fetched to think he will be gone after all of the improvement we have seen overall for the department during his tenure.

NT80, I am not trying to rile you up here, but please explain to me why these schools aren't playing us and haven't played us frequently since we moved up. Yes, SMU has us on the schedule in 2014 (I think), and we have a game against Rice scheduled, but it seems that the attendance isn't the driver here. Beating UNT to most of their fanbase is not a big win, but losing to us is a huge loss. Otherwise, we would always have one of them on our schedule. I am not counting any Texas Big XII schools because the advantage they have is huge and they can afford to play us, although Tech and Baylor won't play us anytime soon because of the pain those losses caused to their team and alumni. Apparently, TCU wants nothing to do with scheduling UNT again because they see no good from it. UH, UTEP, and Rice could use the attendance boost, too. But, they don't schedule UNT much, even though we want to play them often. I still believe that our way in the current environment of FBS football is through an improving Sunbelt and by continuing to play (and actually defeat) Tulsa, La Tech, Army, Navy, and other somewhat notable teams in OOC, while also making it to bowl games. The new stadium will help with that immensely. But I don't believe that the other Texas schools that are mid-majors will do us in favors. Our best hope is to just get better than them--and that is very doable, but it will take a long time from where we are right now. But, at that point, UNT would get to be the chooser in who to play in OOC--or even better, to choose whether to join a confernece that includes some of those old SWC has-beens that cling to their past.