shaft

I haven't thrown an interception all season and my fantasy teams are undefeated. I'd also like to take a moment to make fun the study hall sub-thread. Unless you heard it from a player at a sandwich shop, no one on this board cares about who got study hall.

The only way I think TD should go at the end of the season is if the team goes 0-12. For every win below 3-9 benchmark, he has to make it up the following year. Dumping a coach before you give him three years would be a disaster.

Year 1: pass Year 2: 3-9 Year 3: 6-6 Year 4: Bowl Those are performance standard to hold Dodge to. So why we give him until the end of the season to see he can get it done.

Write a check. Show the students the alumni are raising funds for the new stadium.

Newest bad argument Against UNT is a not a football school/keep Denton weird. 1. I don't know what that means. Is this like "gotcha" journalism? UNT has always had a football team. D1 for over twelve years. No one says football is the defining characteristic of this university. Football isn't the defining characteristic on any school. Universities are a diverse collection of different academic disciplines. 2. A new stadium doesn't trade off with any other program. We can have a great school of music and a nice stadium. For The students just don't understand how important this issue is/Your gonna miss this. 1. Several alumni seem to be struggling with their role in a "student" vote. It's real simple, the alumni need to make donations to pay for their half of the stadium, the students will vote to pay for their half with fees once the stadium is built. 2. The debate must be framed in a way that shows value to the students. Simply dismissing students concerns with "you don't understand" is more a sign that you haven't done a good job of explaining the issues. 3. This paternalistic attitude is more likely to generate opposition to the project.

That editorial is full of "bad" arguments. 1. On field performance doesn't justify a new stadium. 2. Alumni should pay for the whole thing. 3. We should give better scholarships. The first two arguments have been addressed in the bad arguments thread, but this last one is a new argument. We've never heard this before because its not possible. The NCAA regulates what can be included in your scholarship package. But new facilities like a stadium would be very enticing to a recruit. The other argument made in the article is more of a response to a pro-stadium argument, UNT didn't become the third largest school in Texas because of football. This is true, but it doesn't mean a stronger football program wouldn't help the university. It should also be noted that the warrant for this guy argument goes back to on field performance. And of course its easy to counter that argument that the school did grow following its 4 straight conference wins.

Nope. Its called rebuilding, I don't care how we get there as long as we get there. You can worry about how things look after the team has been re-established, but at this point in the rebuilding process the only thing that matters is conference wins. Give the guy a chance to meet his performance measures, before we worry about how he did it.

I was serious about the inflatable gorilla. I know a guy... For alumni who feel left out of the "student" vote I say write a check to the stadium fund. Show the kiddies that there is fundraising support for this project.

Early this season Lou Holtz took a question from a caller about his wife being due the same day as the BCS championship game. Lou had a pretty good answer that the University is not going to miss you at the game at all, you family on the other hand might miss you.

If an article is out can we get one of those inflatable gorillas from a used car lot?

Dickey had to go because he wasted the team's bowl momentum and all signs pointed to him not being able to get the team out of the slump. With Dodge the hope is he can build his way out of the slump. Dodge came in with 4-years to get the team winning. -Year 1: pass -Year 2: 3-9 -Year 3: 6-6 -Year 4: Bowl If Dodge can't reach these benchmarks he should go. So give the guy a chance, his 3 wins for this season should all be conference games.

There seems to be two distinct attitudes across the board. 1. The sky has fallen. Fire and brimestone, cats and dogs living together. 2. Its not time to panic...yet. So my question for the board is when do we "officially" panic? When do we call for a new coaching staff? For me, absent an 0-12 season, Dodge gets to come back. But I think the team must come up with .500 season next year for there to be a year four of Dodge ball.

The newest bad argument Against We don't need a new stadium, we don't even belong in D1 1. That sounds like a bit of an over-reaction to this weekend's game. 2. The vote is about replacing Fouts. Fouts will have the same structural problems regardless of what conference or division we play in. 3. See the above argument about on-field performance as the standard for a new stadium.

Can't we move this to the Band forum? Oh wait.

I heard Pride and Self Esteem are out for the season.

I blame the cheerleaders for not trying hard enough. Of course the buck stops with the head coach. Did we really need a thread about this?

We're 0-4 why all the panic? What reputable prediction had also doing anything different. The real question for this team is what its going to do in conference play. The goal for this team is to beat the 3-9 projections.

How many OOC wins does this team have over the last ten years? We play those teams know and it doesn't effect home game attendance. And what is the difference in being 0-4 vs the likes of OU, UT, and LSU and our current situation.

More Bad Arguments going around. Against: Why does it have to be $10, can't we vote again in the spring for smaller increase. 1. You only get to vote for what is proposed (a $7 increase to begin after the stadium is built), there is no guarantee there will be another vote in the spring. 2. There is no way for the student government to know your "no" vote as a vote to try again in the spring. 3. None of the financial projections have been done at a lower level, it is likely that decreasing the student fee would drag the project out and increase the overall cost of the project. For: This is vote about having football at UNT. 1. No its not. It is a vote about replacing Fouts. 2. You may not be happy with the student vote if they were given a chance to get rid of football. Everyone who votes in these elections is for the stadium. 1. I do not believe there is any accurate, non-biased polling going on campus to support this statement. 2. There are lots of new students, and student groups (official and unofficial). Groups like AWOL, feminist majority league, Denton green party, and a does other anti-war groups like to rally around an issue as an attempt to bring more attention to their cause. These are the type of groups that will latch on to bad arguments, and make a big display of tearing them down. (It easier to play offense and expose the flaws in someone else's logic, that defend your core idea.)

Aren't 80% of stats made up (especially on this board.) Bad arguments won't get this thing built. Bad arguments will only fuel the opposition. Its a lot easier to tee off on something when all you have to do is expose their bad/straw person arguments.

This program needs to make money any way it can, especially if the students vote no. Nice attempt a melodrama, though. But I still think its a good idea to load up on 3 buy games, and 1 game with regional rivals like Tulsa, SMU, and LA Tech.

If you try to sell the stadium based on bad arguments its going to fail. The students can see through fluff arguments like this stadium is going to be more than a football stadium. The students don't care about hosting high school football playoffs, band competitions, and cheerleading. Those types of events are not unique to a new stadium. The student senate will not (and should not) over turn the popular vote. Your going to have to use good arguments to convince the student body to vote for the stadium.

Revenue can go where the AD wants it to go. Currently "buy" game revenue does go to the operating budget, But there is nothing that says additional revenue couldn't go toward the stadium. A real easy way to make an extra million dollars a year is to add two more buy/bodybag games.

The fact that there will be more venues undermines the argument that the new stadium will attract more events. The existence of a new stadium does not guarantee a new event recruitment and management staff. The new stadium will get events like band competitions and high school football playoffs, but I think it is reaching to think the stadium will get events at Pizza Hut Park in Frisco. Alcohol and insurance policies are a huge factor in attracting "outside" events like concerts.

More bad arguments. Against: Why can't the Athletic Department pay for the whole project. 1. This is argument is very similar to "why should the students pay for it" and "why can't someone else pay for it" addressed above. 2. The AD is part of the university which draws a majority of its funding from the students. 3. What other university's have built a stadium this way? Athletic fees are common mechanism to pay for capital projects. For: Think about all the concerts, and big events that will use the new stadium. UNT doesn't not have a successful track record of running non school related events at school venues. When was the last time an outside concert or event game to Fouts or the Super Pit? Events like band and cheerleading competitions, fourth of july concerts, and graduations are common place at every university. The new stadium does not uniquely increase our competitive advantage in hosting these sorts of events.