untgirl04

I'm not disagreeing with you there. I'll acknowledge that having successful athletics programs certainly gets a lot more students through the door. But my point with that was that if we'd maintained inferior academic facilities, we wouldn't have been able to keep the students once they walked on campus. I am by no means saying that we don't need upgrades in athletics facilities or a commitment from our administration. What I'm saying is that until just recently, I don't think it would necessarily have been appropriate for them to make a whole-hearted commitment, when there are thousands of other students who need facilities as well.

I see what you're saying, but I respectfully disagree. Not that improvements in athletics are unnecessary, or that they don't bring in a certain amount of advertisement or community involvement (in theory). But seriously, how many bright young minds go to a university because they want to go to a school with a rich athletics history? Sure, you can point to schools like Nebraska, (gulp!) tU, Texas A&M, Penn State, Oklahoma, etc. They all have rich athletics histories and have a lot to be proud of. But those schools didn't attract talent just because of their football, basketball, or baseball history. What about those thousands of other students who never grace the insides of an athletics facility? What about all those doctors, lawyers, teachers, firemen, researchers, and business professionals who attend the school? Maybe, just maybe, you can make the argument that they originally toured the campus because they'd heard of the football program. I think that's a stretch, but for argument's sake, let's say it's true. But what sealed the deal for them in attending their respective schools was not the success or failure of the football team. It was the atmosphere of the campus, the academic facilities available, and yes, maybe even the residence halls. These are areas touched by all students, not just those gifted with physical prowress. And let's face it - a university is an institution of learning where all are equal - not just a place to glorify those who can run a 4.0/40. I've given tours of the campus, and I've talked to many people about their decisions to attend where they do/did. Most of them make some sort of comment about the general facilities. Even when you talk to athletes or read their comments about a school, they often mention their athletic program, but invariably, they mention the academic facilities, or the campus atmosphere. These were places in which North Texas was severely lacking. We didn't have the space to house our rapidly expanding student body (all potential donors). We didn't always have nice facilities for studying, or classrooms with fully-functioning equipment. We didn't even have many pretty trees or flowers along the sidewalks. All we had was an inch of bird poop. These are the things that leave a sour taste in the mouths of students, and are areas where, as an institution of higher learning, we absolutely cannot fall behind. So yes, there is a great need for improved athletics to better our perception. And yes, it has been an area where the administration has failed for many years. But the fact is, many of those administrations also failed to provide facilities and academics for the rest of the students, and that's ultimately what the university is about. The Pohl administration and now Dr. Bataille have all worked to correct those inadequacies from previous administrations. It's taken time, but they're very near to realizing an absolutely gorgeous campus that we can all be proud of. Now, if after another two or three years, there has been no progress towards a better athletics program (which I doubt will be the case), then yes, let's all get out our pitchforks and run everyone out of town. But to say that a university has an obligation to rid itself of the 900 lb athletics gorilla, when there's a 10,000 lb elephant on its back, is to me, a misappropriation of priorities.

Yes, you can buy cheaper drugs in other countries because most other countries do not have as strenuous regulations on what gets bought and sold. You might get the 'real' Zyrtec or Zocor, but you'd have to think carefully about taking it. Can you be sure that the prescription strength is accurate? The major problem with cheaper meds is that there is often less accountability. Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying our system is perfect. I've had to take medications that were $300 per shot, and had to take two shots per day. (Although, my healthcare paid for all but $10 of a 14 day supply.) The FDA is fanatical in enforcing safety with drugs. Given past issues with Phen-Phen (and to some degree Bacall), I can't say that everything is safe here, but it's certainly better than most places. But that's also why drugs are so much more expensive here. I can't tell you how many adds I've seen on TV about law firms wanting to represent people who have taken all kinds of drugs. There's a lot of liability in manufacturing and selling drugs in the United States.

I didn't mean to imply that Bruce Hall and all of the School of Music were the masterminds behind the failure. I had several good friends at Bruce and in the SOM who did vote for the fee. However, those people seemed to be a lot quieter than the vocal group who vehemently protested the fee. As you said, they did a better job of expressing their displeasure, and I think were more convincing in getting others do vote the same.

Nice find, Flyer.

Ummm... no. That's not what happened at all. Under which rock do you get your information, seriously? The last vote was in 2002, during our conference run. That was after our first trip to the New Orleans Bowl. Most of the residence halls were actually pro-athletics. I was a Wing Senator for one of the residence halls at the time and made many posters to vote and support the fee, so I can say that with some degree of confidence. What happened, in fact, was that many students in the School of Music (and subsequently Bruce Hall) were against the fee, mostly because of a misunderstanding of what the fee meant. The fee was not for anything with the stadium. It was, in fact, a vote for money so that the school could become Title IX compliant. Many students who were against the fee were against it because they mistakenly thought that the fee was specifically for a stadium. The Athletics Department did try to correct the misinformation through articles in the NT Daily and by visiting General Assemblies (I know, because Rick himself attended one of our GAs) at residence halls to answer questions. There were no T-shirts or stickers, but frankly, I don't think that would have made a difference. I was also at school when the fee for the Rec center was passed, and I don't recall ever seeing any T-shirts or stickers for that either. You are, however, partially correct in stating that the residence halls did bring people out in droves. However, that was mostly in support of the fee. I think the fee failed because of a lack of turnout from Greek life and a large turnout by the School of Music. In addition, I fault the SGA for not clearly stating the purpose of the fee from the get-go. The SGA tried to pass the fee anyway (and I commend them for that), but all that ended up happening is that lot of Senators were removed from their positions. From what I've read about the atmosphere now though, I think that the fee could pass, if properly explained and publicized - even if it really is for a new stadium.

I was there for the last student vote. The problem was that a lot of misinformation was spread around about the purpose of the fee and what benefits students would get from it. I did vote for the fee, and after talking to many students who were initially against the fee, convinced others that it wasn't a bad thing. However, by and large, most students who voted negatively did so because they had misinformation as to what was really going to happen. I have no problem with the students voting, and think that they should get a vote whenever possible when it comes to increasing the amount of money they pay per semester. That said, I do think that the fee can pass, if the students get the correct information. Last time around, the Athletic Department did not contain the rumors quickly enough to keep them from affecting the vote. There were no plans, dates, or drawings presented to students to show them progress - just a lot of talk. Show students the progress, tell them how this is a multi-use venue, and show them the benefits of the new stadium, and I think they'll be on board.

Where do I start... They don't pick on the CS majors in the technical writing classes anymore than they pick on any major. Writing, especially technical writing (where business writing falls), is integral to everyone's job. It is a direct reflection on your education (or lack thereof) and ability to communicate effectively. Have you ever tried to communicate in an e-mail or letter with poor writing? Or have you ever received an e-mail or letter that made no sense? I'll bet it took several hours of correspondence to get traction on the conversation. The Technical Writing program at North Texas is one of the best in the country (I believe it's ranked number 3), and focuses specifically on real-world application of writing. The clases are difficult because UNT wants graduates who can represent themselves well in writing and who can communicate effectively. In fact, UNT is one of very few schools who require most of their science majors to complete courses in technical writing. Since you were attempting a CS degree, may I assume you work (or wanted to work) in software development? Someone has to explain to the general public the techno-garble that application engineers put out. Without technical writers (who, at UNT also have training in UI development and usability), everyone might be spending their time trying to figure out the latest MS Works application. An application engineer who has an appreciation for what writers accomplish can work much better in a team environment and will have more value in a company for his or her ability to communicate changes via engineering specs. This won't give you comfort in your grade in the class, but perhaps you might be interested to know that Dr. Cooke has a reputation of being extremely fair and sticking to the syllabus. Perhaps she took your comments under advisement and made changes to her teaching style. In all my dealings (and all my friends' dealings) with her, we have found her fair, honest, and an excellent teacher.

What makes you think Todd Dodge didn't work with the students and try to keep them on track? I'm all for giving second chances, and in some instances, maybe even thirds, but after a point, you've got to teach them a lesson in life consequences. One of my biggest beefs with Dickey was that I didn't feel that there were really consequences for not getting it done in the classroom (see Byerly). My only hope is that those students are able to learn from their mistakes and somewhere down the line appreciate the opportunities that they so foolishly squandered. I had a government teacher once who played around in high school and graduated at almost the bottom of his class. He didn't get accepted anywhere to college (nor did he necessarily care), so he went and worked in the real world for 5 years. Then he realized that he'd never make any money without a college education, went to school at UNT, and graduated with a 4.0. That wasn't necessarily an easy lesson to learn, but if he'd just been handed a bunch of chances at college all along the way, he would never have appreciated it, or gone on to share that wisdom with his students. While all students at the D-1 level have great athletic talents, they've got to understand that the liklihood of making the NFL and being an athlete for a living is very slim. Get it done in the classroom, or go home.

I have to disagree about the farm system. AAA Oklahoma has won the AAA World Series quite a few times, and there's lots of talent to come out of there. The real problem is young player development (especially pitchers). Whenever a young pitcher would start to look solid in the minors, management would bring them up immediately to the Majors and put them in a poor situation. I wonder if pitching coaches (even Orel Hersheiser) had something to do with a lack of free agent interest. The Rangers have had a veritable carousel of pitching coaches, and none of them seem to last all that long. I suppose Dick Bosman would be one of the longer-standing pitching coaches, but there were a lot of rumors that many of the pitchers didn't like him. And watching him out on the mound, you could tell... Another thing that might point to poor coaching is that many pitchers got a lot better when they left the team. See Wilson Alvarez, Kevin Brown, Johan Santana (I think that's who I'm thinking of... the guy who started the All-Star game for the White Sox the year after we traded him away). If all Rangers pitchers were terrible only at home, but pitched well on the road, then I think you could make the Ballpark argument. But there are plenty of ballparks that are just as much for the hitters as ours. I also think management did a poor job of pitching the team to the pitchers (forgive the pun). For a while there, we had one of the best infields in baseball with Young, ARod, Blalock, and Tex, and we had a stable of solid outfielders. It seems to me, if you go to a pitcher and say 'If you just let the ball get into play, we can almost guarantee outs for you - our guys don't make mistakes fielding. And we'll give you the run support you need to make you a 20-game winner.' I just don't see how a competitive pitcher would turn that down unless those facts haven't been pointed out, or there's something going on with management. Mark Cuban, forget the Cubs, please buy the Rangers.

Having probably been in college around the time you were (since my tuition also tripled between my freshman and senior years - and I condensed that into three years), I can't disagree with you on the rising costs of education. However, I just want to point out that education is regulated by the state not federal government. Thank Rick Perry and the Texas Legislature for deregulating tuition if you want to gripe about the tuition increase. TCU does not have higher academic standards. Their school of business was only accredited a few years ago. And just to prove your theory wrong on affording the college and going to TCU... I was one of the lucky ones whose parents could pay for my college education. I was accepted at Brown University, Bryn Mawr, and Baylor, but chose to go to UNT because of its programs, location, and the feeling I got when I stepped on the campus.

Glad to see you mention Vinnie's. It's a fabulous restaurant. Vinnie, the owner (well, part-owner since his parents are also involved), is also attending UNT right now. Our families have become good friends, and they are some of the friendliest, most caring people I've ever met. They make fabulous Italian food, but their Albanian food is (believe it or not!) even better.

I volunteer as an ESL teacher at a chuch, so I thought I should weigh in on this one. One, there are literally hundreds (maybe thousands) of free English classes available in this area alone (and yes, the brochures and flyers are written in native languages) to anyone who is interested. Most church groups especially will work with anyone's schedule to ensure that they get absolutely free English tutoring whenever their schedule allows. The church group I work with provides morning/afternoon classes for those working evening shifts, and night classes for those on day shifts. We even provide free video and/or cassette tapes of lessons for those who can't make any of our classes. And this church is by no means wealthy. In addition, you'd be very surprised at the availability of English classes around the world. Many countries require English as a second language in school - especially in Europe. For our southern neighbors, perhaps lessons are not as easy to come by in their native land, but they are definitely available here in the U.S. Bottom line, if you want to learn English, there's nothing stopping you from doing it - especially when you're in the U.S.

Here's the failing in your argument: You're thinking these students expect the royal treatment at a game that students at UNT expect. At North Texas, we are just beginning to develop a game day atmosphere and some excitement. At Nebraska, that excitement has been there for years (as evidenced by all the championships and the fact that the stadium has sold out for 46 straight years. At North Texas, years of poor advertising and a poor product on the field (excluding a few brief successes during the Fry and Dickey years), as well as a lackluster commitment from the Administration dictates that the best way to get students in the seats right now is to pamper them. We practically beg students to go to games. I know, because I was one of those students banging on doors before games to try to get people to come. At North Texas, we don't raise students up in a culture of school spirit and pride. That's starting to change, but it's the unfortunate truth. By contrast, those kids at UNL live, breathe, and eat school spirit, and most of them have probably been that way since birth. They won't really care where they sit at the games because it's an honor and a dream come true just to go to the games and be part of the Nebraska football experience. Having said all this, I'll freely admit I have never been to a Nebraska football game (although I married into a Nebraska family), so this is all speculation on my part. However, as the daughter of an Aggie, I'll give a brief comparison where I can use personal experience. I've sat in the Alumni section at Kyle Field, and I've also sat in the third deck in the students' section. When the birds fly below you in the stands, you don't have good seats. Just to get those seats, my friend had to put his name into the ticket lottery, and didn't even know whether he'd have permission to purchase at ticket at all until about a week before the game. I didn't hear a single student complaint during the game, and truthfully, the atmosphere was so exciting (even though they were playing Iowa State) that I didn't care that I could barely distinguish players on the field. It was just fun to go to a game. Bottom line: In large programs with a great history of school tradition and pride, students don't really care where they sit in the stands. They just want to go to the games.

I can see your point, but I actually have more respect for Bowden if those facts are true and he chooses not to discuss it. It reminds of what Dodge did last year amid all the racial allegations - he refused to speak negatively about the players. True, you take a bit more of a media hit for it, but I think it does speak a bit more to a man's personal integrity.

I have a coworker who graduated from Clemson, and we were talking about this just this afternoon. He keeps up with his team pretty well, and he brought up some interesting points not mentioned in the article. He said that the article didn't mention that the kid did not have a good year last year, either in practice or on the field. He had multiple incidents where he didn't show up to practice and was warned that if he didn't start attending practices and meetings and have a good work ethic, he would lose his scholarship. I'm not trying to play Bowden apologist here, and perhaps there were some extenuating circumstances that prevented the kid from going to those practices or training in the weight rooms. But maybe he's not all innocent either.

I disagree with only targeting Pit Crew and Greeks. That leaves out a very important, and very vocal/involved group of students - the residents. UNT Housing is historically behind athletics, and residents (at least when I was there in the early 2000s) actually get out and vote. Get the Hall Associations involved, and you can get some real good campaigning. Another thing, for the proposed bill, I think that the Where As statement about Texas State is ambiguous. When you introduce the bill, and in your campaigning efforts, I would focus on why it is significant that Texas State has a proposed athletic fee. Actually, I would do some research and find examples of larger, and more prestigious institutions whose students have self-imposed athletic fees. The most important selling factor in all this, and probably the most difficult, is the tangible benefits that the students will realize (aside from a shiny new stadium) if they help pass this bill. I was around for the last attempt at an athletic fee (and voted for it), so I've seen how nasty this thing can get. Best of luck with your efforts.

There are also five different genetic clotting disorders that can affect the blood's ability to clot. At Denton Regional one of the vascular surgeons uses a more advanced method to break up clots: After inserting a thrombolytic basket to catch any large clumps, he uses a high-pressure saline solution to break apart the clot then suck it out of the body. This is especially useful when the clot is rather large. Then, of course, you start the regularly prescribed anticoagulant therapy. The advantage to this method is that you immediately relieve the pressure/lack of blood flow on the affected muscles. Usually, they use heparin therapy only in the hospital, as it's available only via injection (although they are doing trials in Europe and South America with a pill form). Also, those shots tend to be very expensive (try $300 per shot). However, unless Issac has a genetic or other factor significantly increasing his risk of another clot, he'll be completely off anticoagulant therapy in 3 to 6 months. It's certainly a serious (and rather scary) issue, but he should be able to make a full recovery.

6)Say that you think UNT should join the WAC.

Now it's fixed. Personally, I just think that little kids and free beer are a bad mix.

You're lucky you got to pay yours off in installments. We had to do MGC dues and season tickets all in one lump sum.

The biggest complaint I have about the Blue lot is the "event parking." Like Orange lots from years past, they now tell you where to park. If they'd just figure out which way to park everyone, this wouldn't really be much of a problem, but if you get to the stadium early (4 hours or so before the game), you have to park right in front of Beer Man. It's not really all that easy to have a conversation or hear your self think that close to Beer Man.

Seriously, someone should just send him some Fixodent and forget it.

How many people are in the FAU and Memphis bands? That's my guess.

You'd be better off addressing the comment to eulesseagle. You're correct that Moses tried to get out of talking to the people, and so God allowed Aaron, Moses's brother to speak for him. However, because Moses was raised in the royal Egyptian household, it stands to reason that he had what passed for a fairly good education. Eulesseagle was arguing my comment that a "day" as described in the Genesis account of creation could be more than what we as humans understand as a 24-hour day. (Moses is the attributed author of Genesis; that's why his name came up.) My comment was more along the lines that evolution and a belief in a divine Creator are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and that the Bible does not necessarily discount any theory of evolution. I referenced 2 Peter to illustrate how elsewhere in the Bible it says that God's sense of time is not necessarily our own. But kudos for the Bible knowledge.