Leaderboard

Well it goes without saying this is not a good sign. But being the Mean Green optimist I am I will say this. What if UNT wins just two of the games that it let slip away last season, remember there where 6 games lost by seven points or less. There are two of those six that have really got to0 me more than the most, Army and Ohio. We had Ohio on the ropes many many times, and if Micheal Outlaw can catch just one of the two balls he droped in the endzone UNT wins(one in the 4th and one in the first OT) but I don't put the loss just on him, the D can't allow a team to score on 4th and 20, and Nathan Tune can't throw a pick six with a four point lead in the 4th quarter. And remember Ohio won 9 games last season and played for the MAC title. The Army game; Riley throws three picks and has a fumble inside the Army 20, but saying that, the Army game was lost by some awful game mangement in the last few minutes and some not so cluth kicking,(hopefully Zach Olen will make that a non issue next season). My point being if UNT wins just those two games I beleive they are looked at alot different going into the fall. I truly believe this team is much better than 113 in the nation, and I truly believe that it will be proven next season, am I a Mean Green homer? yes, but that doesn't change the fact that UNT has 19 starters coming back and a new top notch OC. 7 wins plus, I really believe it!! Who's with me?

Dangit Brett!! Why do you always have to bring up SMU's record in your blog? Aren't you supposed to have a strong bias for North Texas? Quit bringing up SMU's lowly, awful program! We already know their basketball team is terrible. No need in reminding us with every post... Go Mean Green! Go Collin Mangrum!

Not taking either side here, but a quick word about the bashing of all things "government run"..... statistically speaking, government agencies perform at incredibly high levels and have customer satisfaction indices as high or higher than many private sector counterparts. The work that agencies like the USPS do on the scale they do it on is astounding. Their performance rates are generally very high. This is not to say that the public sector > the private sector - governments use more contracting out/privatization now than ever before, and it's been an often successful hybrid. The line between completely public and private is blurrier now than ever, and in most cases the public sector is better for it. Both sides are necessary, and can utilize the other to maximize performance and best serve the public good. That said, the myth that the government can't effectively run anything isn't borne out by statistics. Are there problems? Absolutely yes... but given the scope of the operation, cost-per-customer breakdown, and overall satisfaction and performance metrics, most American government agencies that directly serve citizens are very effective and arguably among the best in the world. A good read on the subject can be found here: http://www.cqpress.c...t/Case-for.html ... Goodsell is a interesting dude, and the book is jammed full of surveys, statistics, and other empirical data collected by a number of respected individuals and institutions. It never advocates for any sort of expansion of the public sector or even any sort of superiority of the private sector - it's essentially apolitical, so don't worry. It's simply an analysis of the important work that the bureaucracy does and a more accurate representation of government performance, removed from personal bias and familiar jokes and insults. But I agree w/ LongJim for the most part... we're burying the lead here. TAINT! TAINT! TAINT HAPPENS HERE!

So f those lazy veterans who don't have the resources of your father? I mean they served their country, but then they probably all turned to drugs, had children out of wedlock and are already nursing at the teat of the government like the rest of the poor, right? And certainly why should we establish any regulations on what we put into our body? Ground chuck for $.10 a pound? Hell ya. Who cares if it actually came from horse that died 3 weeks ago and has been rotting in a 90 degree chop-house? And we can just let the pharm companies test their latest break-through out on all of those lazy poor...if it turns out to be successful or carcinogenic its win-win!

nothing can justify swimming in that cesspool known as smu

I'm sure that many of the Boise (and Frog) faithful were saying that same thing not too many years ago. You just never know, and with the new stadium and upgraded staff, we shall see.

Oh, he acknowledges plenty of issues along the way as well, make no mistake about it. But it's a very well done book with legitimate academic surveys, studies, and research from multiple sources. There would have had to be a SERIOUS effort to commit massive academic fraud by a number of people to invalidate the whole point of the book, in which the primary variable is customer satisfaction in service provision. And I'm not particularly comfortable with the argument that a PA or Poly Sci (Goodsell is both) professor can not be critical of PA.... some of the most direct and pointed criticisms of PA in general have come from PA professors... in fact, I'd venture to say few in the field speak glowingly about it (not so much as Goodsell to be sure). That's a massive question of the credibility of an academic professional to assume such... and that goes for professors in any field, not just PA. I'd venture to say most experts or academics feel as though their field could undergo countless changes (and you can find contrarian academic journal articles to almost any idea) - in fact, they're just the profession that often engineers such change.

If the SEC expands, it will be with big-time BCS programs. If they expanded, they would probably get current ACC teams or non-Texas Big XII teams. I don't believe that Texas or A&M will ever got to the SEC. The academics over there just don't match up, and the Big Ten and the Pac-10 would give them both excellent inroads both athletically and academically. Remember, especially in the Big Ten's case, the research funding dwarfs the money raised even by a huge TV contract. UT and A&M would fit perfectly in both cases. I would expect, however, to see the Okie schools to be on the SEC's radar, along with schools like Florida State, Miami, Clemson, or Georgia Tech. No matter what happens though with the Texas schools, I still don't see where the state would allow any other school to join a league that has equal or greater name value than the conference where UT sits. Back in the early 90s, the SEC wanted Texas, who quickly said no, so they decided to go after A&M and Houston. The Texas legislature though made it clear that the two big programs (UT and A&M) are stuck together like siamese twins. So where one goes, so goes the other. But what about UH? They were ready to go to the SEC, but nope, that ended quick. And, of course, the SWC broke up and UH got left behind just like Rice, TCU, and SMU. You see, it is all about power in the legislature--and that power is from UT and A&M predominantly (see PUF dollars)and they weren't going to let UH join a league that they could surpass the big two from. Imagine if UH had gotten into the SEC back then and were the only Texas school in that league--they would be at least better off than A&M and maybe even Texas today, with that rich SEC TV contract and all of the bowl money. I just don't see a scenario at play where another Texas school will get into this new Super BCS, except for Tech possibly, but even if they get protected again, it will be due to the fact that they will be in the same big conference as the other two. I just don't see any way that another Texas school will ever be allowed to join a league that could give them a chance to "surpass" the big guys. Just my $.02 but history is on my side on this one. I agree that TCU and UH will probably be in a league together again, but it won't be in a Super BCS-type conference. This separation of the Haves and Have-Nots looks like it will be swift and it will hurt some feelings again, just this time it will be others looking in from the outside (see Baylor, possibly Tech) who laughed at those who they left behind 15 years ago.

The post office, VA hospital and the FDA are failures? Any political/economic system is a failure in its absolute form, whether it be Capitalism, Socialism or Points for Sex. Thus...balance.

Spud Webb. Oh, that's right!

If only he had waited a couple years he could have played for the NTD Panthers.

Okay, I admit to being ignorant in more fields that cold fusion and cardiac surgery but someone needs to explain the need for the academic universities to stick together. If you're talking about AAU colleges, most of them have long established their lines for research dollar. True, the only Tier 1 universities in the SEC are Vanderbilt and Florida but several others have the capabilities if that became a priority. This is an athletics consortium, not academics, and it's all about money. The SEC could dominate from Texas to Florida with the likes of Florida, Georgia, Texas, Texas A&M, LSU, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Arkansas, and Oklahoma. That would more than match the Big 10 even if they get Notre Dame and Nebraska. If you think that the Big 10 is taking Rutgers because of their academics, think again. New Brunswick happens to sit in the largest media market...New York. A similar case could be made for Missouri, the only major player in the state. Nebraska football has been known nationwide for years. True, in Notre Dame they would get a top-notch academic institution but one that is the most storied in football as well. The Pac-10 has high academics but they are more about liberal politics and secularism. Otherwise, BYU has higher academics than several of their members but they don't fit the mold so they're out. Maybe academics do play a major role in some conferences but for the life of me I don't see why.

I'll say this much... if you at the point in life that would allow you to make a run at it, you owe it to yourself to do so. For real brah.

Stupid freaking public schools. If collared shirts are required, then fine. If not, this is stupid. What if they wore the American flag on Spiritual Baptist Liberation Shouter Day (NZ, I believe)? The anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution? The list goes on...it's always a holiday in one of the 240 (?) or so countries in the world, so do we have to stop wearing patriotic gear altogether just because we are a melting pot of other cultures and have to recognize every single holiday every other country celebrates instead of holding to our own mass culture, which by its very nature includes theirs?!?! I'm surrounded by morons...

What a moron. Admittedly, I sometimes think more force is used than necessary by some holders of the public trust...but that idiot should have been slapped. Where is his mama?! I wonder if they would have been so patient if he didn't have them on camera. It's obvious he was trying to get them started so they would have been justified in at least forcibly detaining him...and with the video quality, you couldn't get much of an ID on any of the cops even if they did do something they shouldn't. Buy a new camera, get an education, get slapped by your mom, then try again, retard. Is there a sequel where he gets smacked around for being a dumbass? I'd pay to see it.

What are you talking about? We're talking about well run entities versus government run entities. If my dad is successful enough to not have to go to the poorly run government hospital, he shouldn't have to. But, that's what we'll all evetually be shepherded into - except the rich, who can always buy out - if we are in the middle class. You miss the point. This point is all of this government regulation supposedly aimed at bringing down the rich never affects them. It's the middle class that is screwed as a result. That's what happened with the credit card reform, and that's what is happening now with banking reform. And, it is going to happen with the health care bill is fully implemented. The rich will go elsewhere and the middle class will be stuck with the bill...and stuck with fewer services than they could chose on their own before the bill. All in the name of 32 million people (which is another lie...they'll dump 50 million on the system), the majority of whom either don't want to buy it for themselves or who refuse to make the sacrifices necessary to budget for it. Also, I pity anyone who thinks that the FDA and pharmaceutical companies are at odds. Those companies have been buying off the FDA for years. Same with the big agricultural outfits that are subsidized to the hilt with out tax dollars. As for any type of further regulation, go hit a law library. There are already over 75,000 pages of regulation on the book federally and more coming every year! And, we need more? At some point, you let the winners win and the losers lose. We already have safety nets for the losers from cradle to grave. Why pull the middle class down with them? Let the failures fail on their own. But, they sure shouldn't dictate how the people in the middle pay taxes - and mostly for services they don't need - and choose services, such are where to get their own health care. You cannot equalize society. It cannot be done because there are too many lazy people. What I'm saying is quit punishing the middle class under the guise of "sticking it to the rich." Anyone who believe "the rich" are getting stuck or having things taken away are completely blind to any basic notion of economics. The rich will stay rich, the poor will stay poor - and the middle class will get screwed along the way every time a bill is passed that foolishly tries to close the "gap" between them. The only way to close the gap is to get off your butt, quit crying to the government, and work!

I think it has to be someone who has actually played in a game and had an effect on the outcome.

While you are cutting agencies, go with a flat tax and cut 95% of the IRS (or more I am flexible on this) and completely cut the BATF-that should be a store not a government agency.

We already have socialism in the USA. We have the richest poor, in all the world, on all our social financial programs...no wonder they don't want to work...no wonder we are flooded by illegals who see a financial gold mine. A banker friend of mine cashes Social Security checks up to $2500 - $2600 a piece for illegals who know no English and only present their Mexican Consulate I.D. Cards. On a side note...if the United States imposed the same restrictions and punishment for illegals as the Mexican governement there would, probably be less crossings and more out cries from American liberals. We subsidize all our transportation, tell educators what and how to teach, pay the poor not to work but vote democratic (see paragraph 1), own the banking industry & getting ready to bail out Greece (yep, as I have been saying all along I knew the American people would come to the aid of Greece just like we did when this administration help bail out some of the other European banks on the first bailouts), getting ready to own insurance, agriculture...., foriegn aid up the yazoooooo. Over the last year and a half or so months their has been an interesting shift in European politics. They, as a general group, have been shifting more to the right. I guess you might say conservative socialists but it has been a move to the right. I think Greece has been the final wake up call with Spain and Portugal not too far behind. England just elected a Conservative .... whatever a conservative is in a socailistic country......Germany has been riding a conservative government....Italy has been riding a small wave of conservatism, lately....but the Italians could swing totally the other way tomorrow and another way the day after that. I think it is in their genes. not to confused with jeans. My point is that while this Admin like past administrations have been going socialist since Wilson, more so under FDR & LBJ the "European socailist model" is in meltdown. Too many people on their "government rolls" and negative population growth brought on by various factors. The only group, in Europe, that is growing are the Muslims. Europeans are at around 1.1 - 1.2 growth (as i remember) and you need something like 1.4 children per household just to maintain growth. The Muslims are at about 4-5. Why are we headed toward socialism? A friend of mine son...who now is a British citizen and works for the government said...."we are still trying to find a model that works." The United States is too far along to go back toward democracy. Everything that is being said, now, is toward "Global Governace." All you have to do is read what is being said by the various governments including ours. One world government.

Seems thought out. ...sigh

Canada, so hot right now, Canada.

DRC

I agree.

I miss him so hard.

Support for a form of government that has proven throughout history to be a failure is thought out? ...sigh

In other words, you're saying we already prop up the lawbreakers and the lazy. Unfortunately, they are reproducing at a faster rates than those of us who work and play by the rules. Here's the most disgusting part of the whole thing - Democrats campaign against "the rich." Fine. They run around now putting even more regulations on the banking industry as whole due to the sins of a few. Then, they go out and say that they are working for "the ordinary American." Really? Who is hurt most by the credit crunch created by government interference in banking? "The rich"? Hardly. They already have theirs. Oh, so they may make a few million this year instead of 10 or 20 million. Meanwhile, small business people, entreprenuers, and families who formerly relied on credit are losing businesses, jobs, and homes. As a commercial insurance agent, I've seen it personally. I've watched a customer who owned 10 restaurants shut down five of them over the past two years because he couldn't get credit lines the way he used to. I've seen a doctor who aided cancer patients close two of his three offices due to his inability to get more credit. I've seen a developer have two office buildings foreclose because he couldn't get lines of credit to continue. These guys were, in ObamaWorld "rich" because they took home more than $250k per year. But, none of them made more than about a million. They own small businesses and provided good paying jobs at one time. But, because the Democrats were so eager to punish bankers and "the rich" because of the mortgage crisis (which was fueled in the first place by government forcing banks to take on bad loans from people who had poor credit histories), they now have closed operations - thereby putting people in the unemployment line. The problem with socialism is always the same - there is no equality of result. You can't force it. The industrious and risk-takers will always gain; the lazy will always fail and be poor. Caught in the political crossfire is the middle class - and, they always foot the bill as they are driven, by their government "saviours," to the poorer side of the ledger.

Exactly. And, ever visit a VA hospital? They are awful. My dad thought he'd go down there because he's a vet. He went once and never went back. Thankfully, he's been successful enough to not have to use these government run atrocities. The FDA? You must be kidding. It is the apex of political hackery and backroom machinations.

It was time when he was hitting the pipe last year. Why does this team just not excite me this year?? Could it be that I actually miss the steroid-induced 15-9 games? That said, I am excited about the way Holland pitched tonight.

ROTFLOL You must crazy. I give you a for your belief. But in the real world NT is going to be for a long time before it is ever more than a in Big boy football.

Finch, good post.