Thank you Coach Chico!

[97and03]

post a link to that of you don't mind.

I thought you were in favor of the extension?? http://www.gomeangreen.com/forums/topic/94816-updated-info-on-macs-contract-extension-from-vito/#comment-820959

Posted 26 Feb 2014 · Report post

Perfect. Like the option on the 5th year.

 

Whereas, I was more skeptical. [Sorry Harry at one point deleted by entire posting history, my past posts (prior to Oct or Nov 2014) only exist when they were quoted by others.]

 

  On 2/26/2014, 9:03:05, 97and03 said:

 

Basically, add a year to the two existing and make the last two performance based, year by year.

[Cerebus]

Perfect. Like the option on the 5th year.

 

[UNT90]

That's why I asked for the link to be posted. 

I was in favor, as long as we were willing to pay it off if it didn't work out. We were. 

The same thing for RV's contract. Except we haven't yet shown the stones to pay it off. 

Will we?

Keep in mind that this was a 3 year extension, not a 5 year. It extended time left on his contract from 2 to 5 years.

And I also mentioned I liked the option on year 5.

Edited November 2, 2015 by UNT90

[GreenTexan13]

post a link to that of you don't mind.

http://www.gomeangreen.com/forums/topic/93627-lifetime-contract-for-mac-archive/

I think you were in favor of a 3 year contract. Read your post, you still called it. If it was a 3 year then we wouldn't be buying out Mac's contract right now.

Edited November 2, 2015 by GreenTexan13

[UNT90]

http://www.gomeangreen.com/forums/topic/93627-lifetime-contract-for-mac-archive/

Ok, we are talking about 2 different things. I was in favor of the 3 year extension but was very against the idiotic, over-reaction idea of a lifetime contract for one bowl win. 

It is interesting that some calling for a lifetime contract are the ones now calling for Chico to be head coach.

Think with your brain.

Edited November 2, 2015 by UNT90

[GreenTexan13]

Ok, we are talking about 2 different things. I was in favor of the 3 year extension but was very against the idiotic, over-reaction idea of a lifetime contract for one bowl win. 

yeah my bad. The point of me using your postings was an example of the emotion that gets involved when North Texas fans get a some sort of temporary satisfaction. whether its a 1 bowl year in a 10 year period. Or us finally getting our first win against a hated team in a down year. I think we get a little gullible and read between the lines when this happens to us.

Its kind of what helps RV hang silence "the minority" for a little bit, until the next blow up happens.

[foutsrouts]

So let's just go hire someone with a name, just because he has a name, and repeat this buyout crap over and over again. The more I think about it the more I lean toward offering Canales, and it has zero to do with one win over a team from San Antonio. I want someone who actually gives a damn about this school. 

[UNT90]

So let's just go hire someone with a name, just because he has a name, and repeat this buyout crap over and over again. The more I think about it the more I lean toward offering Canales, and it has zero to do with one win over a team from San Antonio. I want someone who actually gives a damn about this school. 

Canales gives a damn about being a head coach. If he won 10 games his first year, he would be out of here so fast to a P5 it would make your head spin.

He isn't an alum. He doesn't have the connection you do. Stop being gullible. 

Personally, I want to hire a coach that cares more about winning than he does about UNT. I want a coach that WILL get hired by a P5 in a couple of years. I want a coach that WILL use us to pad his resume. 

Because that is good for UNT, also.

RV isn't an alum. If any better job came open that he could actually get (impossible) he would be outta here. 

Stop falling for politically correct dialog.

[foutsrouts]

Canales gives a damn about being a head coach. If he won 10 games his first year, he would be out of here so fast to a P5 it would make your head spin.

He isn't an alum. He doesn't have the connection you do. Stop being gullible. 

Personally, I want to hire a coach that cares more about winning than he does about UNT. I want a coach that WILL get hired by a P5 in a couple of years. I want a coach that WILL use us to pad his resume. 

Because that is good for UNT, also.

RV isn't an alum. If any better job came open that he could actually get (impossible) he would be outta here. 

Stop falling for politically correct dialog.

You mean like you when you wanted Mac and TD? Let's just repeat this all over again shall we? Wake up, and putting RV's name in every post is obviously getting you nowhere.

[Got5onIt]

When we look back Canales might be the best Head Coach we never hired .....

 

He's already got a better win percentage than Mac & Dodge (I'm speaking with zero research into this stat. Just seems that way).

 

Edited November 2, 2015 by Got5onIt

[GreenTexan13]

So let's just go hire someone with a name, just because he has a name, and repeat this buyout crap over and over again. The more I think about it the more I lean toward offering Canales, and it has zero to do with one win over a team from San Antonio. I want someone who actually gives a damn about this school. 

Maybe we should all just wait another game or two to start making our decisions on Canales. He is 1-3 so far, and he was ultimately the guy responsible for bringing in the right QB. I can seriously sense a UNT trap coming if we start throwing out final decisions right now.  

We also need to finish up our coach wish list (RV actually does I guess) because the coaching openings around CFB are starting to expand.

[foutsrouts]

Maybe we should all just wait another game or two to start making our decisions on Canales. He is 1-3 so far, and he was ultimately the guy responsible for bringing in the right QB. I can seriously sense a UNT trap coming if we start throwing out final decisions right now.  

We also need to finish up our coach wish list (RV actually does I guess) because the coaching openings around CFB are starting to expand.

Agreed. Just don't think we should rule it out before repeating our mistakes.

[UNT90]

You mean like you when you wanted Mac and TD? Let's just repeat this all over again shall we? Wake up, and putting RV's name in every post is obviously getting you nowhere.

I didn't want either. Both were underwhelming hires.

Hire a proven winner at head coach at a program that had similiar challenges as UNT. It shouldn't be hard.

And no, Mac wasn't a proven winner by any stretch of the imagination...

[rws69]

Maybe we should all just wait another game or two to start making our decisions on Canales. He is 1-3 so far, ....

Try 1-2, losses were Thursday night against WKU four days after being named interim coach and then 9 days later at Marshall.

[GreenTexan13]

Try 1-2, losses were Thursday night against WKU four days after being named interim coach and then 9 days later at Marshall.

Nice catch! I didn't get my degree in mathematics for a reason. Lol

[NT93]

Try 1-2, losses were Thursday night against WKU four days after being named interim coach and then 9 days later at Marshall.

Great point.  There's not a coach in America that would be better than 1-2 with that schedule.  I'm not saying that means Canales is among the best coaches in America.  I'm not saying we should hire him because he beat a 1-6 UTKFC.  I'm simply saying the schedule to this point hasn't been kind and the best we could hope for is a 1-2 record regardless of who was coaching.  That being said, I think there are plenty of coaches who'd have gone 0-3.

I fully expect that he'll be 1-4 after two weeks and that will have very little to do with coaching and more to do with getting beaten by two far superior teams.  There are many good teams in college football who would go 0-4 in that stretch of games (on the road at WKU, Marshall, LaTech, UT).  We all knew before the season that the schedule was doing us no favors.

[UNT90]

Great point.  There's not a coach in America that would be better than 1-2 with that schedule.  I'm not saying that means Canales is among the best coaches in America.  I'm not saying we should hire him because he beat a 1-6 UTKFC.  I'm simply saying the schedule to this point hasn't been kind and the best we could hope for is a 1-2 record regardless of who was coaching.  That being said, I think there are plenty of coaches who'd have gone 0-3.

I fully expect that he'll be 1-4 after two weeks and that will have very little to do with coaching and more to do with getting beaten by two far superior teams.  There are many good teams in college football who would go 0-4 in that stretch of games (on the road at WKU, Marshall, LaTech, UT).  We all knew before the season that the schedule was doing us no favors.

You do inderstand that he has been responsible for coaching and recruiting the offensive players on this team for the last SIX YEARS, right?

So if we can't score more than 10 points against La. Tech, a conference foe that we beat 2 years ago, it is ABSOLUTELY Chico's fault.

What planet are you people thinking on?

 

 

Edited November 3, 2015 by UNT90

[MeanGreenTexan]

You do inderstand that he has been responsible for coaching and recruiting the offensive players on this team for the last SIX YEARS, right?

So if we can't score more than 10 points against La. Tech, a conference foe that we beat 2 years ago, it is ABSOLUTELY Chico's fault.

What planet are you people thinking on?

 

Can you imagine what this board will look like if North Texas were to win on Saturday?
Heck, there are several on here who would probably react the same way if NT played LATech to a 7pts-or-less loss.

[UNT90]

Can you imagine what this board will look like if North Texas were to win on Saturday?
Heck, there are several on here who would probably react the same way if NT played LATech to a 7pts-or-less loss.

We will see some want a lifetime contract for Chico if this happens. 

It really is battered fan syndrome at this point. 

[NT93]

You do inderstand that he has been responsible for coaching and recruiting the offensive players on this team for the last SIX YEARS, right?

So if we can't score more than 10 points against La. Tech, a conference foe that we beat 2 years ago, it is ABSOLUTELY Chico's fault.

What planet are you people thinking on?

 

Yes, because Chico is solely responsible for every offensive recruit that has been brought in the past six years.  If that's the case, you should be the one praising him based on the teams performance the past few weeks.

You quote me, but your reply has little to do with anything I wrote.  Did you even read what I wrote?  "I'm simply saying the schedule has not been kind and the best we could hope for is a 1-2 record regardless of who was coaching." 

I'm thinking on the planet that has seen improved play the past three weeks compared to the first five.  I've stated numerous times that I don't think Canales should be our next head coach.

 

[UNT90]

Yes, because Chico is solely responsible for every offensive recruit that has been brought in the past six years.  If that's the case, you should be the one praising him based on the teams performance the past few weeks.

You quote me, but your reply has little to do with anything I wrote.  Did you even read what I wrote?  "I'm simply saying the schedule has not been kind and the best we could hope for is a 1-2 record regardless of who was coaching." 

I'm thinking on the planet that has seen improved play the past three weeks compared to the first five.  I've stated numerous times that I don't think Canales should be our next head coach.

 

Praising him for the 13 points scored against Marshall? For the 14 points scored against WKU when their 5th team defense wasn't on the field? 

For the 7 points scored against an FCS program? 

For the 13 points scored against SMU? 

The clock doesn't reset. Chico doesn't get a pass for the last 6 years. It isn't all DMac's fault. QB is Chico's direct recruiting responsibility, and he has failed miserably. 

Play only had one direction to go. We lost 66-7 to an FCS.

If you don't think he should be head coach, what are we arguing about?

Edited November 3, 2015 by UNT90

[NT93]

I'm "arguing" because you keep referencing my quotes acting like I think Canales is football Jesus.  If you're just now getting that I don't think Canales should be the next head coach then it's obvious you haven't been reading the posts of mine that you've quoted.

You don't like him.  I get it. We just disagree because I think he should be given his due for improving our team this year.  Are we a good team?  Of course not, but I don't think we're the worst FBS in the country anymore and four weeks ago I don't think that was even up for debate.