Green Otaku
-
Posts
1,844 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5 -
Points
37,930 [ Donate ]
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
GoMeanGreen.com
Posts posted by Green Otaku
-
-
2 hours ago, MeanGreenMan09 said:
Seriously, whoever thought it was a good idea to bring Rick back in and put him in charge of something important, like the NIL, should probably also be let go. Let's clean house until we get the results we want. UNT athletics shouldn't be the Rick Villareal retirement fund so he can go watch Garth Brooks for free, and act like he was raising money for our student athletes, gtfoh with that... would love to see if we achieved anything with that night out on the funds checkbook.
I held my tongue when it was announced because I thought maybe it would bring in some $$, but it's a weird situation. Imagine a workplace where the old manager was fired, you were made manager, but the old manager still hung around and then was given a position that raised money for your company.
-
3
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
Those tweets.....
-
5
-
-
2 hours ago, Matt from A700 said:
Damn, sounds like Fouts will be the only lot in the near future.
Even that will have some new dorms built on it. IIRC the future plan was to close campus off more so there is less empty space and replace the lost parking space with multi-story lots like the one close to Kerr. It makes sense, buying land outside of campus is expensive and unpopular if you demolish an iconic place students like to hang out at.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Matt from A700 said:
Any word on what UNT might put there?
If they want to continue increasing on-campus population, there aren't too many lots left to destroy. Well, I guess there is. But I'd hate to see all of them go away.
Maybe build up for a change with a similar residential building to Kerr B Tower?
Will definitely be a new residence hall, that's what the master plan has had on it for years.
Lots 11, 7, and 9 in front of it are also supposed to be more science buildings to build up the science core of campus. So yes more of those lots will be changed to buildings in the future.
-
3
-
-
Any explanation yet as to why Earle was put in the game at that time? It seemed to come out of left field.
-
2
-
-
We have to give credit where it is due. If you can dish out the criticism when things go bad, you have to admit when things go right. There is still a lot of season left to play, with some tough road games on the horizon.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, MrAlien said:
Everyone seems ready to fire this guy with out knowing who's next... do y'all really want roll the dice on another first time head coach, one with out any college recruiting experience? How many current players would you expect to stick around for that? not to mention the fact that they would probably wait until spring to put a coaching staff together leaving them way behind in recruiting and transfers.
People were worried we would lose players to the portal last year if SL was let go, and we all know what happened.
-
1
-
-
35 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:
When you look at the body of work over the last 3 to 4 years it should be obvious we need a change. Heading into a new conference is the perfect time to make this change
Noted, and the reason why I thought this thread was important. We all know various eyes look at these forums, so let it be know that no outcome of this season can change your mind.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:
Can we file this thread in the ONLY AT NORTH TEXAS section
It is time for a change, please stop trying to justify a reason to keep Seth. Do you care so little about UNT?
This isn't a thread to justify keeping him, if you think I'm one of the people who are advocating he stay you're wrong. The point of this thread is to gauge where people think the axe should come down. Some in here clearly think it should have happened already, but if for some reason he has a miracle run and goes 9-3 would any program really let their coach go?
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, southsideguy said:
he could win the rest of the games and I would not keep him. He struck out twice against AAC teams and got destroyed by UNLV that is toward the bottom of MWC. No bowl wins.
Although it is very unlikely, winning out would get you to 10-3 with a CUSA championship, even then it'd be a no for you? I think that'd be a hard sell even for those of us that have been wanting change.
-
3
-
-
3 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:
If he can get to 8-5 WITH a bowl trophy I could stomach a very short extension. That is and should be the bare minimum watermark.
This becomes tricky, because 8-5 would mean you either went 8-4 and lost the bowl game or 7-5 and went to a bowl game and won. This could put you in the same position as last year with 7-6 if you don't win the bowl, and late in the race to get the best options out there. I say if loss #5 happens you drop the axe then and there.
-
2
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, meangreenfaninno said:
Haha yeah I agree with you. Sometimes I worry if we get good and things are running smoothly that I’ and many other UNT fans will lose interest. People are drawn to the constant drama I suppose.
Oh I don't worry about that because it always seems like,
UNT:
-
3
-
2
-
-
What record would you need to see to consider keeping SL?
For me it's 8-4 to even think about seeing him next year. 7-5 isn't going to cut it, so in my eyes he has 2 more losses until he should be gone.
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
4
-
-
11 hours ago, greenminer said:
Football definitely brings in the money, but I would love more insight about how conferences view the other sports. I have to believe they have some value.
Only men's basketball is seen as the other money sport IIRC. The credits from the NCAA tournament can be a nice bump if you have multiple teams make it, or if teams make a deep run.
-
1 hour ago, MeanGreen_MBA said:
What games are we supposed to play this year? We have the games on our schedule to play. We need to win as many of those games that we have on our schedule; not some random “better” teams you figure we should be winning. Let it play out.
if we clear the table, I suspect it would be a more successful season than most on the forum expected we have 7 games left let’s win 5-7 of those games and celebrate
Winning 5 conference games isn't something to celebrate. We want to build teams that compete for championships, not teams that can only tread water enough to become bowl eligible. New coach? Yes that's acceptable, but not year 7 for a program.
-
3
-
-
23 hours ago, Pseudo Nym said:
Clearly he is looking ahead and this is only a small part of the larger point of focusing on the moment, being where your feet are, and having ones head in the clouds.
So far as constant questioning, this isn't the Yankees or the New York media, or Alabama, Arkansas, or UT media for that matter. No one his hounding him with "constant questioning of whether or not he will return to UNT." No one.
Read the damn room.
So twice now, he's talking about the NFL. This is not where the starting QB's head should be and I would expect a leader of this team, age be damned, to have a better understanding of the position they're in, the platform they are on and the message they're sending.
There's a reason mantras like "We over Me" exist and why coaches talk about fighting for their culture everyday.
It's why Saban talks of Belichick's "Do Your Job" (Period!) as the singular focus and responsibility of everyone on the staff from the head coach to the equipment manager, and the players, from the starters to the practice squad.
It's the quintessential rat poison and lack of focus talked about by high performing teams and coaches every week that they seek, no fight, to avoid falling into.
To use your word cockiness, I don't see cockiness, I see fantasizing about the future at the expense of focusing on the presence.
As such, I see someone who is lost and needs to be reeled in and brought back to reality; the fact that this is where our starting quarterback is, age and experience considered, is nothing short of a flat out shame and disappointment.
Brutally accurate.
-
5
-
1
-
-
49 minutes ago, GMG_Dallas said:
I think this is funny. Some guys play better in games than in practice but they also need full time with the 1s. Can't just throw them in cold at the end of the game without being in rythm with the speed of the game with 2s and 3s and hope the performance is up to par.
We also aren't taking into account how much a change at QB can motivate others. I'd imagine some of the receivers are tired of being missed wide open and the defense is tired of getting stops just to be back on the field 4 plays later. Make a change, see how the guys rally, and you might get more out of everybody even if the QB play isn't markedly better.
Also, I see evidence that other QBs can make the team better. You just have to look at more than what they've done in limited snaps at UNT. At the end of the day, if Aune isn't making you a championship contender, change him out. You either play for championships or you play to get other guys ready, not for 6-6 bowl games.
If only there had been some game in which we were up 3-4 scores and virtually no risk to evaluate what else you have at QB. But what for right? We don't need any kind of contingency plans.
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, MeanGreen2019 said:
I mean for God sake I don’t get the Wren chatter. The only mistake he’s made is giving Seth an extension, which everyone on this forum celebrated at the time.
Also not letting SL go last season. 6-6 should not have been a season saving record.
What this board needs to understand is WB is locked into letting this season play out, he gave SL to chance to redeem himself so it would be in bad faith to pull the plug before he has chance to. I know people won't be happy to hear that, but it's how it's going to go. Once the season is past that point of no return, the he will act. IMO after we hit loss #5 is when he will pull the plug as even a 7-5 season won't be enough. At least that's what I hope.
-
4
-
-
3 minutes ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:
By "value" I meant monetary value. Stanford is a little behind Oregon and Washington in that respect. That said, all 3 of those teams have asked and been denied by the B1G. At least for now.
I do think Stanford would add $ to their contract, but I think the Big10 wants a home run and that is ND. They want ND and 1 other, and out of those 3 I would think Stanford would be picked over the other 2. Being the #3 school in the country to a conference that cares about academics is a big plus.
-
1 hour ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:
It's pretty clear that they only want to add teams who will increase the value of their conference. At this point, any more additions from the Pac 12 will only dilute their value, with the likely exceptions of Washington and Oregon.
And Stanford. They have been successful in the past, and would academically be welcomed with open arms.
-
4 hours ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:
A. OF COURSE, the Pac 12 commissioner is going to throw out every reason he can think of to stop UCLA (or USC) from leaving.
B. The University of California Board of Regents is trying to negotiate a way to get Cal-Berkeley into the B1G as a package deal.
Winner!
Especially point B. They will say, "To lessen travel and impact on the environment Cal, Stanford, Oregon, and Washington should come along too. You know, to save the environment. "
-
1
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, southsideguy said:
Wonder why they didn't?
I'm not sure honestly. Maybe they didn't want the students/donors/alums to know how much they were spending to get out of CUSA early.
Maybe @Arkstfan can shed some light on it.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, southsideguy said:
That is great news, however why did Judy not want to disclose the deal to the other schools leaving the conference?
Not her or CUSA, the departing schools are the ones that didn't want the amount disclosed.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, southsideguy said:
If we have paid the fee I would sue them for some money back.
Lets see the guys who left early get a better deal than the guys who met the obligations? Makes since to me.
Has anyone sent this to WB? Judy has some explaining to do.
Do we get any of the money from them leaving early?
I hope we did not screwed off the field like we did on the field.
Leaving member forfeit their conference payouts, so no we don't get anything from the 3 that left. That will be split by the remaining teams.
And no, I don't think UNT is paying anything outside of forfeiting their payouts, since we followed the bylaw and gave CUSA the appropriate amount of time.
-
3
-
2
-
PAC 12: Will It Survive?
in Mean Green Football
Posted · Edited by Green Otaku
The problem isn't the lowered pay out, it's that schools might actually bail if the payout is that low. This could create a domino affect where one or two teams leave, lowering the deal even more, which then makes others leave, etc. This could be a very quick and nasty collapse if it all goes bad.
$16m would be almost half of the next lowest P5, the ACC* that gets $30.9m a year. The Big12 get $43m a year, you can bet that the AZ, CO, and UT schools are going to jump if they have a chance.
(correction, I wish the AAC payed out $30m 😆)