MGB: Sources say Baker is UNT's leading candidate heading into call on Friday

[UNT 90 Grad]

30 minutes ago, FirefightnRick said:

That's what we want, so yeah.

 

Rick

Is that what we want or what we wouldn't have a problem with?  Personally, I'd rather have someone that raises our program from the ashes, is constantly bringing in fresh ideas, continuously exceeds our expectations (like leading us to national titles), and sticks with us up to his/her retirement while turning down poachers from other schools because they love North Texas.  I like success AND stability.   That said, if they get poached in a few years, so be it as long as we get a similar or better replacement.  

[GrandGreen]

It is a given that any athletic employee at the G5 level if successful will probably be offered more compensation somewhere else.  It is also true, that NT has to have a lot more of that type of employees.

It is just strange to me that this issue is continuously discussed before anyone even has anything to base an evaluation on.  It would make more sense at NT based on history, to worry about who we are going to replace them with when they don't meet expectations.     

[MeanGreenTexan]

If SMU bails on the "good faith talks" that are supposed to occur after this next game, we'll have several years freed-up to schedule home/home series.  
Also, maybe, just maybe, a new guy could negotiate out of some of the FCS games or body-bag games?

[Harry]

2 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

If SMU bails on the "good faith talks" that are supposed to occur after this next game, we'll have several years freed-up to schedule home/home series.  
Also, maybe, just maybe, a new guy could negotiate out of some of the FCS games or body-bag games?

Agreed.  I feel like if we ever beat SMU they will buy out the contract.  Just hope and pray RV put some type of buyout language in that and other deals.  Unfortunately the deals made by prior regime will be with us for some time.

remember the last time we beat SMU they fired their coach.

[untjim1995]

4 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

If SMU bails on the "good faith talks" that are supposed to occur after this next game, we'll have several years freed-up to schedule home/home series.  
Also, maybe, just maybe, a new guy could negotiate out of some of the FCS games or body-bag games?

SMU shortening the series would be awesome if it means we can replace them with better teams...

[Wag Tag]

7 hours ago, Matt from A700 said:

Congrats guys! We accomplished a whole lot in the last year.... our only needed upgrade now is our men's basketball coach...

I believe Prez Smack new he was going to let RV go  and wanted the new AD to make the decision on the BB coach. This is a new kind of Prez!

[Harry]

12 minutes ago, Wag Tag said:

I believe Prez Smack new he was going to let RV go  and wanted the new AD to make the decision on the BB coach. This is a new kind of Prez!

Smatty deserves a LOT of credit for these changes.  I know a lot have emailed him their complaints I hope the same will thank him for working hard to right the ship.

[GoMeanGreen1999]

Any chance of him being here long enough to locate Ray?

[Matt from A700]

On 7/27/2016 at 4:36 AM, UNT 90 Grad said:

...and get the baseball train back on the tracks.  

Of course! But at least our current baseball coach isn't as bad as our current basketball coach.

[UNTcrazy727]

On 7/27/2016 at 8:31 AM, untjim1995 said:

SMU shortening the series would be awesome if it means we can replace them with better teams...

I'd rather this happen with Army

[Mean Green 93-98]

On July 27, 2016 at 8:31 AM, untjim1995 said:

SMU shortening the series would be awesome if it means we can replace them with better teams...

The SMU series is one of the better things RV did, IMO.  There aren't too many other opponents that will can legitimately expect to be competitive with who will generate comparable interest.

 

57 minutes ago, UNTcrazy727 said:

I'd rather this happen with Army

I like Army too.  I'd just rather cut down on the 1AA teams and get rid of 5 home game seasons altogether.

[MeanGreenTexan]

34 minutes ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

The SMU series is one of the better things RV did, IMO.  There aren't too many other opponents that will can legitimately expect to be competitive with who will generate comparable interest.

 

I like Army too.  I'd just rather cut down on the 1AA teams and get rid of 5 home game seasons altogether.

[UNT90]

3 hours ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

The SMU series is one of the better things RV did, IMO.  There aren't too many other opponents that will can legitimately expect to be competitive with who will generate comparable interest.

 

I like Army too.  I'd just rather cut down on the 1AA teams and get rid of 5 home game seasons altogether.

SMU only creates interest with the 400 or so hard core fans, of which you are 1, so of course you like the series.

Just because 400 people really like it doesn't mean it's a "good" series. At all. 

[Army of Dad]

10 hours ago, UNT90 said:

SMU only creates interest with the 400 or so hard core fans, of which you are 1, so of course you like the series.

Just because 400 people really like it doesn't mean it's a "good" series. At all. 

SMU is a team we should regularly beat, has some (mostly undeserved) name recognition, and is local.

Just as long as we take care of business on the field it's fine, maybe even a very good series/matchup.

You have to find some wins on your schedule. I'd love to see some better opponents at home, but SMU is not a bad matchup. Win consistently and you won't have to worry about them only bringing 200-1,000 fans...

[TreeFiddy]

smoo is not the biggest problem on our schedule.  Focus on the biggest problem, which for UNT and a lot of G5 schools is the P5 paycheck game.  Figure out a way to get it off the schedule and the difference in our OOC schedule will be night and day.  Removing this game is the next big hurdle.  Hopefully, WB is not a fan and will work to get them removed going forward.

I am not suggesting we try to buy out the ones already there since it will cost a ton of money, but I would like to see an announcement that we are moving away from them and spend the next few years putting things in place to ensure that we can stop using that strategy.  It would be great to even announce some H/H series even though they would pretty far out.  WB is going to have to show that things are really changing if he is going to build more support in the MGC and season tickets.

[meangreenbob]

On ‎7‎/‎26‎/‎2016 at 4:21 PM, wardly said:

Wonder why Baler isn't in mix for Missouri A.D. position?

This is a very very good and fair question to ask.

[UNT90]

24 minutes ago, meangreenbob said:

This is a very very good and fair question to ask.

He is under consideration.

 

[UTSA Fan]

23 minutes ago, meangreenbob said:

This is a very very good and fair question to ask.

There could be a number of reasons that are valid, but, inconsequential to UNT such as personality mismatch, difference of vision or how to go about achieving that vision, etc. Definitely a valid due diligence question, but not as negative as it may appear.

[xyresic]

6 minutes ago, UTSA Fan said:

There could be a number of reasons that are valid, but, inconsequential to UNT such as personality mismatch, difference of vision or how to go about achieving that vision, etc. Definitely a valid due diligence question, but not as negative as it may appear.

Mizzou currently has interim leadership - Hank Foley was named interim chancellor in late 2015 and their AD search just started.  With out a chancellor under contract there was uncertainty for WB.  A new leader could potentially bring in a new hire and that may have not been the best fit with WB. He was receiving significant consideration for the top spot at Mizzou from many prominent folks, but we acted quickly and were able to offer a pay raise and certainty.

[UNT90]

4 minutes ago, xyresic said:

Mizzou currently has interim leadership - Hank Foley was named interim chancellor in late 2015 and their AD search just started.  With out a chancellor under contract there was uncertainty for WB.  A new leader could potentially bring in a new hire and that may have not been the best fit with WB. He was receiving significant consideration for the top spot at Mizzou from many prominent folks, but we acted quickly and were able to offer a pay raise and certainty.

Yes, not only an interim chancellor, but an interim President, also. 

[EagleGreen]

We came in quick on WB.  Mizery had him in the mix but wasn't ready to pull the trigger.  They have an image problem right now, much like us, where they need to assure the masses they are doing the right thing.  It would be similar to UNT offering a young and upcoming asst AD on staff the job because he was offered a position elsewhere (although we didn't really have one). We wouldn't have liked it. 

I'm excited about our future and hopefully he can right the ship. 

[UTSA Fan]

2 hours ago, xyresic said:

Mizzou currently has interim leadership - Hank Foley was named interim chancellor in late 2015 and their AD search just started.  With out a chancellor under contract there was uncertainty for WB.  A new leader could potentially bring in a new hire and that may have not been the best fit with WB. He was receiving significant consideration for the top spot at Mizzou from many prominent folks, but we acted quickly and were able to offer a pay raise and certainty.

Thus the famous axiom, it is the early Eagle that gets the Baker.

Edited July 29, 2016 by UTSA Fan