Jump to content

rjmunthe

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    179

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Points

    0 [ Donate ]

 Content Type 

Posts posted by rjmunthe

  2. 2012 Mean Green Football Schedule

    in Mean Green Football

    Posted

    This thread is completely pathetic and you guys are so out of touch it's not even funny. You may be a bunch of whiny people who can't ask off for a Tuesday night game a year in advance, but most will and WILL BE incredibly excited that we're on ESPN. Enough with the bitching. Seriously. Having 5 games sucks but it's an easily winnable schedule. 7+ wins are EXPECTED. People will show up. Knowing that we don't suck this year, fans will come. It's not like before. When we were good before, it was because "Oh, the Sun Belt sucks, who cares? Our stadium is a dump." People will show up. Get rid of the bad FAU and MTSU weather, you have a really good attendance yearly average. Look what winning does: see ULL.

    • Upvote 4

  6. Would you prefer Texas State, UTSA, Both or Neither?

    in Mean Green Football

    Posted

    After their very successful season, my sources at Sam Houston are telling me that there are some strong rumblings about their school moving up to FBS ASAP, and I'm sure that SFA can't be too far behind. Also, Southwestern Univ. (a charter member of the SWC) is starting a program next year for the first time since the 50's, and they appear to have ambitions of returning to prominence.

    Since we all know that UTA is also strongly considering the move, we could have us a nice tight little regional conference brewing here. What do ya say about UNT, UTA, Sam Houston, SFA, San Marcos, San Antonio, Lamar, and Southwestern? I mean, if we want to reunite with the two "Sans", why not the rest of 'em?

    Outstanding rivalry and road trip potential, and we could pick up other Texas schools as they move up the ladder. The Texas Conference? Or maybe The Greenhorn Conference would be more appropriate.

    We don't need another Southland. Furthermore, it's gotten to the point where it's ridiculous that if you win the FCS Championship you get an auto-bid to the FBS. Sam Houston will not be able to pull fans...that school is about as much regional commuter as it gets. We don't need another Southland, and, I for one, would be disgusted to be playing the likes of UTA, Sam Houston, SFA...we pride ourselves on being in the second tier of Texas schools, and by lowering ourself to those schools levels, we have dropped into the basement of Texas. Remember, football runs schools; people assume how good a school is here by football. And if UNT is in a conference with SFA, we then become them and lose our legitimacy. We need to make our move fast, get to the CUSA, and leave all these hyphens and wannabes behind us.

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 3

  7. Karl Benson ready to get to work on new-look Sun Belt Conference

    in Mean Green Football

    Posted · Edited by rjmunthe

    1. here is the listing for endowments....TxState has had the higher endowment since 2008

    http://www.nacubo.org/Documents/research/2011_NCSE_Public_Tables_Endowment_Market_Values_Final_January_17_2012.pdf

    372 Texas State University-San Marcos TX 119,711 94,709 26.4

    390 University of North Texas TX 110,735 82,513 34.2

    the US News does not use endowment specifically as one of their criteria and US News is just as bad of a source as wikipedia.....and I have not provided any wiki stats.....I have provided stats from recognized organizations that collect endowment data yearly from several hundred universities and I have provided stats from the THECB which audits all state universities and publishes those metrics......next time you should try and provide any proof of anything you are saying......because so far you have provided nothing and attempted to ignore the truth

    US News and World Report reports on endowments. They have different numbers of the endowment dollars versus UNT and Texas State, thus the reason why UNT is ahead of TSU-SM in the Tier 1 race. THECB audits but is not official. We can agree to disagree. You got THECB from Wikipedia.

    http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/09/12/methodology-undergraduate-ranking-criteria-and-weights-2012

    again endowment is not a listed criteria and you have provided no link to US News listing endowment information.....while I have provided a link to the NACUBO that conducts a yearly endowment study and has done so for about a decade or more

    The point there is that UNT is a far superior school to TSU-SM.

    2. the % of students admitted means nothing.....it is a bogus statistic because it assumes the university has control of how many students apply and the qualifications of those students......who applies to a university and how qualified they are is out of the control of the university.....anyone can submit an application and any quantity of people can submit an application, but that factor is out of control of the university which means the number is irrelevant

    if one university has very high entrance requirements and they have 100 applicants and 100 of them are qualified they would have a 100% acceptance rate....while another university can have very low admissions standards and have 500 applicants and only 100 are qualified and they would have a 20% acceptance rate.......and the quality and quantity of those applicants are out of control of the university.......this always plays into the hands of private universities especially because those universities have individual applications and those universities have much more control of who they admit outside of their guaranteed admissions...so students will often apply hoping they will make alternate admissions......while state universities often have general state applications and have guaranteed admissions......just like it states on the UNT website below....GUARANTEED admissions...so students can use a single application and only apply to the schools they know they will be admitted to......which lowers the number of applicants VS privates that have much more flexibility in admissions and much more freedom to use financial aid as an incentive...so students will take a chance and hope to make alternate admissions or individual review and then look at any potential financial aid availability as well

    it is a useless metric....the metric that is meaningful is what standards a student has to meet for admissions and what metrics those that were admitted had upon admission.....not a % of admitted that relies on factors outside of the control of the university like total number of applicants

    So you don't understand statistics now? How they work? Obviously you got your education from TSU-SM. Have you ever applied to a Texas college? It's not guaranteed. The way it works is those are the requirements, but if 10K+ students with really good grades apply that are way above the minumum, obviously those get in over the minimum. So you don't understand statistics nor the College Board.

    some rankings use % admitted, but that is why those rankings are not respected....because those factors are meaningless and easy to manipulate as are many of the other factors they use

    since I am sure you will question that as well

    here is proof

    http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/03/rankings

    3. the US News rankings and National VS regional categories are not based on a ranking....they are based solely on the number of PhDs graduated at a university

    and the US News uses the Carnegie Foundation Classifications to make those categories.....to be classified (the Carnegie Foundation does not rank universities they classify) a DRU or higher by the Carnegie Foundation a university needs to graduate more than 20 research based PhD students per year.....the US News bases national universities on being a DRU or higher and regional as classified outside of the DRU.....TxState will have graduated 20+ research based PhDs and will be a DRU or higher when the next Carnegie Classifications come out.....which means they will be a US News national university....and the Carnegie Foundation specifically states their classifications are not a basis of quality

    here is proof

    http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.org/resources/faqs.php

    Where are the Carnegie rankings?

    The Carnegie Foundation does not rank colleges and universities. Our classifications identify meaningful similarities and differences among institutions, but they do not imply quality differences.

    http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/09/05/methodology-best-colleges-ranking-category-definitions

    The Carnegie classification has been the basis of the Best Colleges sorting system since our first ranking was published in 1983,

    and before you say any comments about UNT graduating more research based PhDs.....remember that TxState only has 10 PhD programs VS 35 for UNT and TxState still does more total research and more restricted research than UNT does with restricted research being the first criteria needed for NRUF funding

    so with over a 3rd less Phd programs than UNT TxState still is a more productive overall research university and they are adding PhD programs while UNT is actually reducing PhD programs down from 50 in the past

    Do you understand what "endowment" dollars means? Obviously not. It doesn't show whether one is more productive than another. Furthermore, our endowment dollars are higher according to the report submitted by the state of Texas to US News.

    4. http://www.unt.edu/admission/

    notice where it says AUTOMATIC ADMISSIONS

    notice where it says applicants will BE GUARANTEED ADMISSIONS

    notice that website has the brand new tagline green light to greatness

    http://www.unt.edu/vwbk/admission.htm

    notice the dates on there.....admission for FALL 2012.....is MARCH FIRST 2012.....so that is this fall......with those GUARANTEED ADMISSIONS REQUIREMENTS

    I provided the proof......right from the UNT and TxState websites......those are the fall 2012 guaranteed admissions standards for automatic admission......again anyone can apply, but all that meet those requirements will be accepted.....that is not debatable.....there is no super top secret selectivity......there are only the metrics listed for each university that each student must achieve to be guaranteed admission and the required deadlines for submitting proof of meeting those metrics.....and the metrics I linked to are for the fall of 2012

    you do not have proof because what you are saying is false....it is proven false right there on the UNT website where the deadline for early admission for fall of 2012 is less than a month away.....and the guaranteed admissions criteria are specifically listed....so again the proof of what I am saying is right there and the disproof of what you are saying is right there

    you can ignore that as you wish.....but you will be ignoring the truth

    Guaranteed =/= Minimum. Sorry, child, your logic is embarrassing.

    5. is this actually some type of argument...related to academics....the use of a hyphen in a name?

    really you think that has some meaning?...seems more like desperation on your part sort of like ignoring the stated admissions requirements above.....but hey if adding -San Marcos to a name makes you feel academically superior in spite of multiple listed statistics then I guess that is what you will have to clutch at because you have provided nothing of value or any proof so far...but that does not seem to stop you

    Name me some good hyphenated schools. I can name you good directional schools.

    6. http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/education/article/Regents-toughen-UTSA-admissions-requirements-3206561.php

    there is proof that UTSA is raising their admissions

    So, UTSA is raising standards to UTA levels. No longer open admission. Cool.

    7.

    http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2011/Attendance.pdf'>http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2011/Attendance.pdf

    TxState averaged 12,805 in 2010 playing in D1-AA

    UNT averaged 17,718

    http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2011/Attendance.pdf'>http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2011/Attendance.pdf

    in 2011 UNT was 18,864 in their new 30K stadium

    TxState was 15,107 still in D1-AA in a stadium that holds 15,968 after the first round of renovations

    so if opening your new stadium and being 12K+ below available seating on attendance while having played in D1-A for the last 15 years makes you feel better then have at it

    and UTSA averaged 35K+ (in a stadium they DO NOT EVEN OWN!) as if that makes ant difference to anything.....in their first year ever of football.....so they would have had to turn away fans if they "owned" a stadium the size of the one at UNT......while UNT was 12K short of a sellout average

    and you bring up WINNING!...TxState was 6-6 last year in D1-AA.....UNT was 5-7 in D1-A

    they were 4-7 in 2010...how many years back do you need to go to claim their fans don't show up

    in 03 the best year for UNT in decades you averaged under 19K

    TxState averaged 10,500 that year...and they were 4-8 in D1-AA

    so it looks like TxState is growing their attendance while not doing much of significance and still not even fully in D1-A while UNT can claim about 18K when they win and about 18K when they open a new stadium

    TxState will be D1-A this year and have a 30k+ stadium that has just been remodeled for the second time in the last few years after coming off of a 6-6 season in D1-A while UNT will be in the second year in a new stadium after going 5-7

    so 2012 will be a great year to compare....I would not be looking to UNT to be much over what they had this year and I would look for TxState to be well over what they had last year

    and UTSA was double both + some

    Texas State won the FCS Championship in 2010. Surely you'd expect fans to come out, right, to support their championship team? Nope, they don't. And when they end up 1-11 for a few years in the WAC, it will continue to drop. Do you really think they'll come in and own the FBS and people will want to come watch them? Nope. And as of right now, UTSA has a leg up in attendance. But like a new relationship in a honeymoon period, you can expect it to drop next year. The fact of the matter is, when you have seven losing seasons in a row...see how your attendance would go then. Our attendance when we were good is irrelevant; we had just come up from FCS, and played in the worst stadium in the NCAA. Houston and Indiana attendance prove there is a fanbase out there. We pulled 29K to a game versus Houston opening a new stadium after an embarrassing loss on the road, then 22K after an embarrassing loss to Houston to open our stadium, oh and don't forget about Alabama game.

    so again sounds like a lot of excuse making on your part....but hey we can see from the above that you like to ignore the reality of readily available information and ignore words like GUARANTEED ADMISSION and the like in favor of some super top secret and yet to be revealed stats that you have that shows how superior UNT is Vs TxState.....and we have not even discussed total research, restricted research, or 4,5 and 6 year graduation %....which TxState is higher in

    And you fail at being able to read and analyze things, or use accredited sources. Of course Texas State-San Marcos grad rates are higher, lower standards and it's easier to get into...obviously they will have a better graduation rate. Total research $ UNT outnumbers Texas State-San Marcos.

    I am looking forward to your :sword:

    Please stop calling Texas State-San Marcos Texas State.

    • Upvote 2
    • Downvote 2

  10. Karl Benson ready to get to work on new-look Sun Belt Conference

    in Mean Green Football

    Posted · Edited by rjmunthe

    um...

    the endowment information was linked....TxState has had a larger endowment since 2008....they are 10% higher now at 110 million VS 100 million for UNT

    Uh, no, look at the statistics. This is not true. Where you are getting your info is beyond me...US News and World report disagrees with you...next time, stay away from Wikipedia statistics.

    the admissions requirements for UNT are 950 SAT for 16-25% of HS class ranking.....they are 930 for TxState.....1050 for second quarter at UNT 1010 for TxState......they are both 1180 for 3rd quarter

    First off, you have a 75.5% acceptance rate which is ridiculously stupidly high; a near open university and your ratings aren't even good enough to put you in a National Universities category, your school is still considered "Regional". Look at US News for proof. SAT scores are not the only option. Just because you have a blanket requirement doesn't mean you accept everyone with a 950+ SAT score...but keep trying.

    http://www.admissions.txstate.edu/future/freshman/getting-accepted.html

    http://www.unt.edu/vwbk/admission.htm

    those are hardly significant differences considering those are not extremely high scores and that puts UNT pretty much below UH and TxState right below UNT in the emerging research and public universities in Texas

    Once again, no, read up on statistics, our endowment, and academic standards are much higher and are getting even higher come Fall. No proof yet, but the statistics out are proof enough of our academic superiority

    the name TxState is a great name and it was a wise decision to make the change and many UNT fans are upset they got the name when UNT had wanted the name and been denied in the past

    You do realize how SWTSU got that name right? They conceded to the state of Texas and accepted Texas State-San Marcos. You are not Texas State, You are Texas State-San Marcos. Hyphen. Just like UTSA and hell, even UT-Tyler or UTA.

    UTSA has a much lower admissions standard and they were near open enrollment until recently when the TAMU-K-SA campus opened and it became TAMU-SA and that will be the university to take students with lower admissions while UTSA will move towards higher selectivity and higher graduate enrollment

    Where are you getting your info, once again?

    and isn't it hard for a school that is 36K, with 5 million plus in the metro area, and 100K+ alumni in the area, a brand new stadium, and decades in D1-A to call out a school on attendance that is in a much smaller market, with lower enrollment, and fewer alumni nearby that is just moving up to D1-A for the first time...especially when the difference is only a couple of thousand

    Well considering we've been piss poor for five years and have a history of apathetic football while UTSA is the only football in the area (attendance will not remain this high, I'd bet a thousand bucks on it. And Texas State can't sell out their mediocre sized stadium playing in the FCS Championships, why would they sell out a 34K stadium? Furthermore, our attendance would've likely been higher had the MTSU and FAU games not been a disaster weather wise. But that's an excuse; the point remains when we win, attendance will come. SWTSU wins in FCS and people still don't come.

    and it is not trolling when factual information with verifiable sources is provided

    So try again.

  13. Karl Benson ready to get to work on new-look Sun Belt Conference

    in Mean Green Football

    Posted · Edited by rjmunthe

    Of course they did. I've heard before that NT officials in the '60s or '70s wanted that name for our school.

    Being able to call themselves Texas State is going to be huge for that school over time.

    The biggest problem they have is being located in San Marcos and having such terrible academic standards. Oh, and shedding that party school label. Screw Texas State. UTSA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Texas State. Let SWTSU flounder. (I'll pull an SMU on them.) If SWTSU thinks they're better than us, they'll learn the hard way. They're more irrelevant than us, that's an accomplishment. They aren't even "Texas State". Officially they're "Texas State-San Marcos". You couldn't even sell out a 15K stadium last year. Who signed that lease for the 34K renovation?

    • Upvote 2

  14. Karl Benson ready to get to work on new-look Sun Belt Conference

    in Mean Green Football

    Posted

    LOL! We have Texas State trolls now? Where are you getting your numbers and statistics? We're ahead of you in endowment dollars and yeah, your graduation rates are higher because a 4th grade reading level are all that's needed to gain entry into your school. Texas State has the WORST name in the state of Texas. "Who?" Literally. Did you switch from Southwestern Texas State to Texas State to make it seem like you were more legitimate? Bro, nobody cares about Texas State. You are the worst school in the worst conference in the FBS, you were mediocre in the FCS, you'll be pitiful in the FBS. And please, don't even compare your stadium to our stadium. You'll be lucky to get 27K in your stadium for Tech, and if you do get more, it'll be 50/50 Tech and State. Go back to your hole, you're more irrelevant than us.

    • Downvote 5

  19. Vitriolic Hatred Of SMU: Why?

    in Mean Green Football

    Posted

    SMUt will never fill the stands, especially in the new CUSA. Whatever, the only reason your football team is where you are at is because of your years of illicit operations. And at the end of the day, you may be ranked highly, but you are still a wannabe Ivy League school despised by the city you are located in because UNT grads outnumber you in epic fashion. Go pound sand, we'll send you back to the Big East when we do whoop your ass again.

    • Upvote 4
    • Downvote 4

  24. CUSA contacts Temple: Merger changes weekly

    in Mean Green Football

    Posted

    I don't want to be in the CUSA anymore. The Sun Belt is getting quite strong. Tony Mitchell has given the conference national recognition, MTSU and Denver are turning heads as well in basketball, we look to be a MAJOR force next year. Arkansas State is getting scary good, WKU moving up, UNT also moving up with our beautiful new stadium, FIU/FAU, etc. The Sun Belt has more to offer than CUSA, except for regional opponents. We should raid WAC and grab some of these teams and stick with the Belt.

    • Upvote 6
    • Downvote 6

WE BELIEVE IN THE MEAN GREEN!

News

Recruiting

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.