Early predictions (survey)

[dmill]

Jeff Sagarin rated us as the 180th best team in all levels of college football last year (includes FCS). I went back through every year since 2004, and it was our lowest rating.

Previously we were 144th, 63rd, 118th, 121st, 150th, 160th, 171st, 168th, 148th, 161st and 102nd. 

Before last season, I thought we would definitely improve on our awful 2014 season. Of course, that didn't happen, and we actually sunk to the lowest of all-time lows. But now we have a new QB, a new coaching staff, and some new energy around the program. Some on this board are optimistic, others think this could be Dodge Era part II. 

So, here are my very simple questions: 

1. Will the team be better than last year? Yes or no. If yes, how much better? A little better, a lot better? If worse, how much worse? Before you answer this question, IGNORE what you think our record will be. Focus instead on the quality of our team. (i.e., it's possible that we could win more games than last year despite being less talented or worse, due to schedule.) 

2. Will we be better or worse offensively than last year? Again, if better, how much better? If worse, how much worse? 

3. Will we be better or worse defensively than last year? 

*If you can explain why you think what you think, that would be good, but certainly isn't necessary. Just trying to get a better feel for the pulse of the fanbase. 

[Mean Green 93-98]

1.  Yes, noticeably better.  In part, because, as you mention, last year's team was historically awful.  We aren't loaded, but we have enough talent to approach the middle of the C-USA pack.  Last year's team flat-out gave up.  They lacked a serviceable FBS QB, the most important position on the team.  They now have what I am confident is at bare minimum a serviceable FBS QB.  I believe the new staff will be able to get more out of the players, in part because it would be hard to give less than they gave last year.  I'm not saying we'll win a bunch of games--4 would be an accomplishment--but I expect noticeable improvement.

2.  Better, in large part for all the reasons mentioned in #1.  Plus, Coach Littrell is bringing a system that has been successful.  I'm not entirely confident in our O-line, and it seems the staff is not entirely confident in our WR corps.  But as bad as it was last year, I'd be shocked if that didn't improve this year.

3.  Better, but not as significantly.  I'm a little surprised about losing Buyers from the secondary, but the staff must obviously be comfortable with the secondary to let a player like that go over to the other side.  D-line is a little thin, but players like Tillman Johnson and Jareid Combs ought to be hitting their stride next year.  It sounds like the coaching staff will have them playing aggressively--that can go either way.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Mean Green 93-98

[EagleMBA]

9 minutes ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

1.  Yes, noticeably better.  In part, because, as you mention, last year's team was historically awful.  We aren't loaded, but we have enough talent to approach the middle of the C-USA pack.  Last year's team flat-out gave up.  They lacked a serviceable FBS QB, the most important position on the time.  They now have what I am confident is at bare minimum a serviceable FBS QB.  I believe the new staff will be able to get more out of the players, in part because it would be hard to give less than they gave last year.  I'm not saying we'll win a bunch of games--4 would be an accomplishment--but I expect noticeable improvement.

2.  Better, in large part for all the reasons mentioned in #1.  Plus, Coach Littrell is bringing a system that has been successful.  I'm not entirely confident in our O-line, and it seems the staff is not entirely confident in our WR corps.  But as bad as it was last year, I'd be shocked if that didn't improve this year.

3.  Better, but not as significantly.  I'm a little surprised about losing Buyers from the secondary, but the staff must obviously be comfortable with the secondary to let a player like that go over to the other side.  D-line is a little thin, but players like Tillman Johnson and Jareid Combs ought to be hitting their stride next year.  It sounds like the coaching staff will have them playing aggressively--that can go either way.

Not being lazy...really! I think MG 93-98 has been reading my mind and just beat me to the punch. I couldn't say it better, so I won't try. If you are keeping score dmill, just take the above response, times 2.

[Wag Tag]

2 hours ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

1.  Yes, noticeably better.  In part, because, as you mention, last year's team was historically awful.  We aren't loaded, but we have enough talent to approach the middle of the C-USA pack.  Last year's team flat-out gave up.  They lacked a serviceable FBS QB, the most important position on the team.  They now have what I am confident is at bare minimum a serviceable FBS QB.  I believe the new staff will be able to get more out of the players, in part because it would be hard to give less than they gave last year.  I'm not saying we'll win a bunch of games--4 would be an accomplishment--but I expect noticeable improvement.

2.  Better, in large part for all the reasons mentioned in #1.  Plus, Coach Littrell is bringing a system that has been successful.  I'm not entirely confident in our O-line, and it seems the staff is not entirely confident in our WR corps.  But as bad as it was last year, I'd be shocked if that didn't improve this year.

3.  Better, but not as significantly.  I'm a little surprised about losing Buyers from the secondary, but the staff must obviously be comfortable with the secondary to let a player like that go over to the other side.  D-line is a little thin, but players like Tillman Johnson and Jareid Combs ought to be hitting their stride next year.  It sounds like the coaching staff will have them playing aggressively--that can go either way.

Really excited for the new season. I am looking forward to big improvements on the D side of the ball. Linebacker play I expect to pick up dramatically with scheme and talent coming in. We will have great size at linebacker and DE and going to a 3 down I think will accentuate these strengths. Moving Buyers to the O side of the ball shows we are strong in the DB area. 4 wins would be nice, but be competitive and show improvement will mean a lot! GMG

[UNT90]

1. Whether the team is better or not depends on whether Morris can play QB, and if so, can stay healthy. This team was awful last year offensively and especially at QB. But Morris was the only addition at QB that can help immediately. If he gets hurt, look for 2015 offense all over again. I expect this team to be slightly better, as in 3 wins tops. And that's if Morris is the real deal and stays upright. If not, this team could be better yet have a worse record than last year. That's right, it's possible. 

2. See above. Depends on QB play and protecting that QB.

3. Worse. Possibly much worse against the run. There is a severe shortage of DT's on this team. The new scheme will also take an adjustment period. 

4. Special teams. Don't forget this aspect of the game. UNT is already struggling to find a return guy. Field goal kicker needs a rebound year and return to his freshman form after a disappointing year last year. This is another area that I think takes a step backwards. 

3 wins would be a fantastic year. Zero wins is a distinct possibility, especially when you take the schedule into consideration. 

[UNTexas]

1. Last year's team completly quit. If the team tries to play like a normal team then we will be better. 

2. Mac's offense was awful. Even with a team that quit the offense got better once he was fired. So, the offense will play better under the new system.

3. The poor D will play a lot better if the Offense plays better, see 2, so hopefully they won't be exhausted with their backs on the wall every series.

My dream would be a situation like 1993 vs 1994. Parker was fired after only winning 4 games with several blow out losses. Simon came in and went 7-4-1, went toe to toe with every team (Including Oklahoma State & lost by a long field in the final seconds which sucked), and won a conference championship.

The difference between those teams was heart and attitude. The talent was about the same. It can happen again but these players need to dig deep and decide if they want to play football or not and if they want to be winners or losers.

Edited April 20, 2016 by UNTexas

[Ben Gooding]

We'll be better across the board. We have a coaching staff now. We will not go 0-12 and it's not even a remote possibility. Bethune Cookman is awful, so we got that going for us. 

[North Texas Shep]

1) Yes, we will be better. We have some new coaches that seem to know what they are doing and are getting results (It seems so the 3 scrimmages/practices I saw). Also, I am impressed with the organization compared to the last regime. Lastly, these young men have bought in. I spoke with a player's dad at the scrimmage and he stated all around it is a better situation for the players, as stated by his son. 

Now, with all that said. In a couple of year we could be contending for a top stop in CUSA.

2) Better on offense? Well hell yes we will! Last season was a joke. The previous system was not known for producing big points. The new system is made for that. I believe, if Morris can control the turn overs, he can set passing records at NT this season. He has talent and wants a chance to show it. We have not had a QB talent like this since Brock Berglund... Just joking. Ha! But really it has been decades since we had a QB like this. Can't wait!

3) Defense should be better. I think even if they are not amazing, they will be better if the offense can take more time from the clock. The lbs, corners, and ends look pretty good and improved from what I saw in practice. The new co- defensive coordinators are fired up and I believe can get more out of the guys then the crap we had last year. Should see some heads gettin crack once again in Apogee.

PS Not going to spell check. Too much work, this late.

[casual fan]

1 hour ago, Ben Gooding said:

We'll be better across the board. We have a coaching staff now. We will not go 0-12 and it's not even a remote possibility. Bethune Cookman is awful, so we got that going for us. 

We hope you're right about Bethune Cookman because they were 9-2 last year and rated higher than us by Sagarin.

I noticed they signed a juco RB that had 11 FBS offers.  

They also signed 6 OLs,,,,,shortest 6-4 ....only 1 under 300 lbs.

After last year, I take nothing for granted.   

[UNT90]

7 hours ago, Ben Gooding said:

We'll be better across the board. We have a coaching staff now. We will not go 0-12 and it's not even a remote possibility. Bethune Cookman is awful, so we got that going for us. 

Butt Cookman ended the season last year just outside the FCS top 25 with a 9-2 record and have won or shared the MEAC conference championship in 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015. A really stupid scheduling move by a terrible AD.

Cookman was a better team than UNT last year and will probably only be a slight underdog in the game at Apogee.

They aren't awful, far from it, so we don't have that going for us. This could very easily be a loss.

Edited April 20, 2016 by UNT90

[SageDaddy]

Before  the conference schedule released, I thought we had a shot at bowl eligability, then we got handed the toughest CUSA schedule again. Just flipped the locations from last year. Thanks for that CUSA. That said, beat SMU and sort the rest out after. Wouldn't a loss to SMU this year be the first time they win in Denton? And btw, why do we schedule FCS paycheck games against top 25ish programs? Not helping ourselves.... and paying for it.

[southsideguy]

3 wins

[Wag Tag]

1 hour ago, SageDaddy said:

Before  the conference schedule released, I thought we had a shot at bowl eligability, then we got handed the toughest CUSA schedule again. Just flipped the locations from last year. Thanks for that CUSA. That said, beat SMU and sort the rest out after. Wouldn't a loss to SMU this year be the first time they win in Denton? And btw, why do we schedule FCS paycheck games against top 25ish programs? Not helping ourselves.... and paying for it.

What scares me about SMU is their last 2 recruiting classes have been dramatically better than ours. Those guys will start showing up! Beating them would be a huge boost to start the season.

[Army of Dad]

1. Better, but not by much. Too thin across the board and lack of depth may rear its ugly head. 

2. Better, though a statistical improvement will also be system driven. 

3. Better, mostly because it would be difficult to be that bad again. We should have a better system, again mostly because the last one was so awful. 

[ABrownGMG]

1. Overall yes but I wouldn't expect a significant bump. On the assumption that Alec Morris can be a quality QB during a game (which I think is being too widely assumed right now) you still need receivers for him to throw to that will actually be successful. Our best players on offense are in the running back position and we're moving into an air raid style offense, doesn't really mesh too well.

2. I think it would be very hard to be worst offensively than last year. Decent QB play and an improved Wilson will make for a better offensive year.

3. In my opinion, a lot of people are thinking too wide frame for this question. When I think about if we will be "good or bad" I usually consider our opponents and their play styles. CUSA teams are very pass happy on average, and our secondary will be significantly better. The run defense may lack from not having much depth on the line, but I think the JuCo transfers that we picked up will do just fine to hold their own at the line and force opposing offenses to pass into a more experienced secondary. 

 

[Army of Dad]

12 minutes ago, ABrownGMG said:

1. Overall yes but I wouldn't expect a significant bump. On the assumption that Alec Morris can be a quality QB during a game (which I think is being too widely assumed right now) you still need receivers for him to throw to that will actually be successful. Our best players on offense are in the running back position and we're moving into an air raid style offense, doesn't really mesh too well.

2. I think it would be very hard to be worst offensively than last year. Decent QB play and an improved Wilson will make for a better offensive year.

3. In my opinion, a lot of people are thinking too wide frame for this question. When I think about if we will be "good or bad" I usually consider our opponents and their play styles. CUSA teams are very pass happy on average, and our secondary will be significantly better. The run defense may lack from not having much depth on the line, but I think the JuCo transfers that we picked up will do just fine to hold their own at the line and force opposing offenses to pass into a more experienced secondary. 

 

Juco pickups aren't usually that successful in their first year of D1 ball. 

The relative few who are typically go to the upper level teams...

[MGNation92]

1. I think we will be significantly better. More aggressive play styles will result in more opportunities and a coaching staff that relates better to the players and puts them into positions to succeed.

2. Offense will be better by leaps and bounds. It won't even be close. I think Morris will be one of the top QB's(if healthy) in the conference. Couple that with Wilson and Ivery I think out offense will be potent

3. Defense will be better based on principle alone. Ekeler and Reffett will have an aggressive defense. They will attack the ball, not sit back and hope to make a tackle. I suspect we'll see more blitzes and man coverage(There's a reason they moved Buyers to WR, he's a zone corner).

[Aldo]

I'll just combine all the questions.

Our run game can only get better as we are bringing more experience and more talent. But it all hangs on the line's ability to mesh and pick up a new scheme. Or pass game obviously hangs on Morris. In theory/pedigree, he's a better QB than what we've had the past couple seasons. In practice, he's also looked better than McNulty/Means/Dajon ever did. Game time? For the sake of the argument let's say he's also better. Goree showed last year he could beat guys (with route running) and get open, the ball just never came. So he is the one guy I will hang my hat on. Smiley needs to improve his hands/concentration. So it doesn't leave a lot of proven experience here. Enter Wilson and Ivery. In practice, they've been targeted plenty that I feel that these guys will be involved heavily in the pass game, whether it be swings, screens, and dump offs. So if you get these guys involved, I feel a little better about the "receiver" situation. Per Vito, Kelvin Smith has looked good, and I am getting excited for the kid.

So on offense, I think will have a bump based on the assumption that Morris is better than what he had last year and the year before.

On defense, while I am confident in our pass D, I'm not as confident in the run D, but I don't know much about that area of the game, personnel wise.

So overall, we may be stagnant. Better statistics, marginally better in wins.

But I hope we carry some hype through next offseason much like SMU did this past one (for real, they won 2 games, what gives).

[Mean Green 93-98]

35 minutes ago, Army of Dad said:

Juco pickups aren't usually that successful in their first year of D1 ball. 

Which brings the question (and the thread hijack) . . .

Why aren't juco players redshirted more frequently when they get to campus?

[UNTLifer]

Sounds like Wheeler might be the exception to the rule.  At least I hope that comes to pass.

[GOMG2013]

49 minutes ago, Aldo said:

 Enter Wilson and Ivery. In practice, they've been targeted plenty that I feel that these guys will be involved heavily in the pass game, whether it be swings, screens, and dump offs. So if you get these guys involved, I feel a little better about the "receiver" situation. 

This.

We have an offense that will utilize both of our explosive backs and top players and they will be in the game at the same time.  Then you add top recruit goree and others.  We go from being an offense that can key on stopping one player, to at least having 3 weapons on the field at all times.  

[Army of Dad]

57 minutes ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

Which brings the question (and the thread hijack) . . .

Why aren't juco players redshirted more frequently when they get to campus?

Because they are supposed to be ready and coaches seem to want them in and out in 2 years saving the roster spot and redshirt a for HS players?

[untjim1995]

We will be MUCH better offensively, even if Morris gets hurt. That's because we have a coaching staff that knows modern offense.

Our defense and special teams probably won't be measurably better, because of lack of size and speed. 

Our program will be better because of Littrell's fresh approach and recruiting should get better--in part because it cannot get worse than Metamucil McCarney's approach.

But we aren't catching any breaks with the CUSA schedule. It's brutal for our team right now. We have one game we should win, in Butt Cookman, as well as a road game at UTSA that could be a win. SMU at home probably is a possible win, too, but less than UTSA, for sure. Two wins would double where we were when Littrell took over this dumpster. That would represent major improvement, as sad as that sounds. But the hole we are in is so deep, it's gonna take years to dig out of.

[Mean Green 93-98]

5 hours ago, Army of Dad said:

Because they are supposed to be ready and coaches seem to want them in and out in 2 years saving the roster spot and redshirt a for HS players?

Well, yeah . . . But as you already pointed out, the "supposed to" doesn't usually correspond with reality.  They often need a whole year to adjust to the game and speed at the FBS level.  If players were more often redshirted out of juco, they would be more likely to contribute 2 solid years of play to the team.

[Graham]

We will be better for one, broad reason. Because we have a staff that's willing to adapt and change their system based on the talent they have, instead of force a system onto group of kids that aren't, well, Iowans.