untgirl04

Well, after letting the news sink in a bit more, I think I'm cautiously optimistic at this point. As someone else already pointed out, she's been a major party of several universities with high-profile athletics. Now, although her athletic support at said institutions is not documented, it is just as likely that she understands the impact of athletics on a university as she doesn't. Although you make good points about diversity as a whole, I actually think this is a positive spin on the university. We market ourselves as being very diverse, and hiring a president who supports diversity is a very good thing for our programs. We can continue to improve our cooperative learning programs with other countries, and perhaps develop some cultural programs that gain national prominance. With the better academic programs, we could potentially attract the scholar-athlete (provided we don't lose support for athletics). I do however, like the no-crap attitude with which she approaches situations. I think that our faculty senate, if left unchecked, could really run athletics into the ground. From her comments, I take it that she won't put up with the crap, nor crap from Lee Jackson, if she disagrees with the direction in which they turn the university. Very good point about holding both LJ and the BOR responsible for whichever hire they make.

If you read the article, that's not the case. She was chosen from 19 other candidates. However, you're right about Lee Jackson hand-picking this one. This concerns me as well.

I posted this in the UNT News section, but I figure more people will read it here. Click here Based on her background, I have a feeling the new president won't be quite as friendly with athletics. But I could be wrong.

#2 is the Aggies. My dad is an Aggie, and I grew up thinking I wanted to be an Aggie too. I can still sing the fight song and school song from memory, and Kyle Field is one heck of a place to visit. I also rule at Aggieopoly. Speaking of which.... are they ever going to get a North Texas-opoly? Every time the game store opens up in Vista Ridge Mall, I go in there and ask them for the game. But every time, they say they don't have it.

Well, if you let me know you're coming, I'll make sure to buy an extra bottle or two of paint. Actually, we've painted as few as 5 and as many as 15 or so people for a game. Occasionally, we get someone bringing over their little kid to get painted as well. For a 6pm kickoff, we start painting around 4. We park at the back of the lot, have a white tent, and have an American flag and a North Texas flag flying from the tent poles.

I have to disagree. While not everyone wears the bikinis (I'm sure that's what you were referring to), lots of people do dress up quite well for the games. I wish I had a picture on hand - Sean, Nicole, or maybe Big Will could help me out here - but we were the crew in 2002 who opened Sports Center and got compared to Raiders fans. (One of my proudest moments.) Maybe you should drop by our tailgating party before each game to get painted up and join us in the fight song.

Clock management is a major concern of mine. But going back to what Emmitt said about QBs.... I agree completely. However, I think a lot of the interceptions MP threw last year were due to being put into poor situations. If you notice, each time he was put into the game, the first play called was a Hail Mary-type pass that was always incomplete or intercepted. If we continued with the ball, the second play was always a shorter route pass that resulted in good yardage. Maybe this didn't happen every time MP got into the game, but it happened at the FIU game, FAU game, and Ark St. game that I can remember.

Granbury also has random drug-testing for any students in extracurricular activities. It's a UIL thing. My only issue with it is that they don't necessarily pull you out during the class period for that activity. They pull you out in the middle of classes you need to be in.... like English on a test day.

Wow, those are some beautiful facilities. Don't really like the ultra modern design on the basketball arena, but it's still very nice.

Dang. You beat me to the post.

You're right. I did overestimate, but it's still 6 figures. According to the NT Daily article (I realize the vulnerability of my source), the total cost was about $150K. The link to the article is here.

I think the price tag was somewhere between $250 and $500K. I have to admit I'm a little disappointed with how little we're seeing the new logos. The bookstores have done a decent job of getting the new stuff on the shelves, but you can still find plenty of the stupid parrot eagle and even the gold and blue star.

Striking people out has absolutely nothing to do with being the best pitcher ever. Jamie Moyer, although definitely not a dominating pitcher, does just fine even with his below-average fastball by forcing people to hit into outs. If you ever played baseball or softball and pitched, you'd know your coaches tell you that while the strikeouts are nice, forcing the ball into play is not a bad thing. As a pitcher, your job is to get the ball over the plate. That's why you have a team behind you. They're there to stop the ball and get the out. Strikeouts are icing on the cake. Btw, Cat Osterman is not the only dominant pitcher to play softball. Check out Lisa Fernandez. Having seen her play in person, I can tell you you wouldn't want to bat against her. However, Coach is right about softball being a bit reliant on dominant pitchers. I don't know if the solution is to drop back the mound though. Honestly, when you have a girl who is 6' and with her pitching motion can leap halfway to the plate on delivery, it's hard to hit her no matter how far back you are. I think the problem of dominant pitchers is a natural one based on the mechanics of fast pitch softball. Even if you avoid crow-hopping (illegal in softball) then you can still get some good distance off the mound. I think honestly that the best solution is just to continue working on batting mechanics. Too many girls don't get the good instruction they need at the plate.

I don't think softball is one-sided. Yes, you have an ace pitcher. Every team in baseball and softball does. The reason they're able to pitch multiple games per day is (1) softball teams generally have fewer total members, so everyone has to give a little extra (2) softball tournaments are grueling - even if you win, you may play back-to-back-to-back-to-back games, so you get used to it (3) softball games have fewer innings. I played ASA ball for 8 years, so I saw my share of amazing pitchers. One good friend of mine threw a minimum of 250 pitches per day. At the age of 12, she had a 65mph fastball and 4 other pitches: a rising fastball, sinker, curve ball, and changeup. She was dominant for about one year, and then guess what? People started getting their timing down on her. She was still a great pitcher, and was only getting better, but so were the other players. Softball players are athletes - they'll figure it out.

Then it's a missprint because TCC doesn't have athletics. TCC Homepage

I wasn't dogging on Roosevelt because of his policy, nor do I think he was a terrible president. In fact, TR is one of my all-time favorite presidents. I was simply pointing out that Wilson was not the first president to get us involved in international affairs. Although I tend to vote conservative, and lately that means Republican, I don't like to see one-sidedness regardless of whether or not I agree. I think people should vote for the issues, not the politicians or the party, and should be very concerned with whom they elect to office.

You're correct that Washington warned against foreign entaglements, but I disagree that Wilson was the start. Theodore Roosevelt, with his "Speak softly and carry a big stick" policy brought America into the international arena. Panama Canal anyone? And he was a Republican...

Actually, according to my Culture and History of the Weimar Republic (Germany's first attempt at democracy, and the period of time between WWI and WWII) class, Germany's method of electing leaders (aka vote for the party and they'll put the right leaders in place), as well as the stiff penalties imposed on Germany from WWI (which were favored by just about everyone but Wilson) were what led to Hitler's rise to power. Although the National Sozialistiche Deutche Arbeits Partei (NSDAP became Nazi party for short) was originally created as a blue collar worker party, Hitler gained purchase there for his brashness and speaking abilities, and somehow coerced the party president to name him Chancellor when the NSDAP won the election. Because Germany did, and still does to my knowledge, elect parties and leaders on a plurality, the NSDAP (Nazi) party won with only 30% or so of the vote. Within the year, Hitler proclaimed himself Fuehrer, disbanded the Reichstag (Parliament), and the President mysteriously died, leaving Hitler in total control of Germany. He played off the country's heavy burden from WWI, rightfully pointing out that Germany took more than her fair share of the bargain (Italy's penalty was basically a slap on the wrist). Hitler gave the people a target for their anger in ethnically different people, specifically Jews and gypsies. While completely wrong, anti-Sementic views were not exactly scarce in those days. [Minor in German]

computer issues.... sorry.

repost. sorry.... computer issues.

I don't really see how that complaint doesn't apply to any sport. If someone is head and shoulders above the rest, then it stands to reason that they'll dominate. Although Cat Osterman is currently such a standout, it's not like there've never been multiple standouts on one team. I'll point to the original USA Softball team with Lisa Fernandez, Shiela Cornell, Michelle Smith, and Dot Richardson. You're always going to have dominant pitchers in baseball or softball. Look at Roger Clemens, Greg Maddox, Randy Johnson (although half the time he loses the game from lack of run support), and many others. Finally, I don't think the distance from the plate to the pitcher's mound should make any difference whether or not you care about the sport. Love the sport for its strategy, althleticism, and cameraderie or leave it.

Actually, the Saddam/Hitler comparison is not as off as you'd like to think. Although it's true Saddam was not invading as many countries, he was still in the genocide business. You can find out more here: Human Rights Watch Report on Iraq

F-Zero was on SNES.

Super Mario Bros. 3 (greatest game ever) Duck Hunt (I still hate that stupid dog!) DuckTales Legend of Zelda Dr. Mario