untgirl04

Wait... (assuming you meant 'killed' instead of 'called') are you saying that the NCAA essentially penalizes a team when a player is killed?

We went to the Ft. Worth Zoo for our honeymoon too! But we also went to a Ranger's game and to a musical at Fair Park.

1. Right now, I agree with you. I don't like burning Riley's shirt, but I also saw that the team had a bit more life when he was in the game. You can't deny that Riley is a great threat: He could run with the ball, catch the ball, or throw the ball to someone else. And Vizza is one heck of a blocker when he needs to be. While I'm not overjoyed with the decision to play Riley, I'm adopting a semi-wait-and-see attitude about it. I'll give it 2 games into conference until I make my decision. 2. Completely agree about the O-Line play. I didn't get to see the KSU game, but it seems we gave up more sacks/hurries to Tulsa than to KSU. If someone wants to do the research to confirm/disprove that, feel free. Either way, the Tulsa D got through our line all night, and while Vizza held the ball too long in several situations, that's still unacceptable. I have a feeling Lefty will have them better by the end of the season, but as SilverEagle pointed out, and what seems to be the main concern for me, is the lack of conditioning. I don't lay that at Lefty's feet, since I see that everywhere on the field. We have a lot of players out there huffing and puffing. Is our strength and conditioning up to par, and if not, why hasn't that been addressed? I think (aside from dropped balls) this could also improve our special teams play. I have yet to see a good, solid hit on special teams, and it seems the players take forever just to get down the field. By the time we're in position to stop them, the returner has already made it past the 40-yard line.

A rollercoaster engineer, right? I seem to remember hearing he designed the Texas Giant.

Thank you. They're all guys, and great Mean Green fans at that. Some of them are still around campus.

The Whataburger on the corner of Carroll and I-35 has some UNT memorabilia and pictures of NT alumni.

I've been watching this debate closely, and as McCain's most likely targeted voting block (female, undecided) with this nomination, I thought I'd weigh in. I'd first like to note that every Vice Presidential running mate for some time now has been a campaign decision: I can't really justify Bush/Quayle off the top of my head, but Clinton chose Gore for his clean record and appeal to environmentalists; Gore chose Lieberman for the Jewish, left-leaning conservative group and Senatorial experience; Kerry chose Edwards to try and carry the South (as well as his then-likeability and connection to the 'common man'); Bush chose Cheyne for his oil and big business ties; Obama chose Biden to counter his lack of foreign and Washington experience and age-factor; and McCain chose Palin for the age-factor, ethics background, and the women vote. Personally, I would have preferred Kay Bailey Hutchinson, but I don't necessarily think Palin is a bad choice. Smitty's points about ethics investigations certainly concern me. It's pretty bad when your major running point is under investigation for possible violations. This is probably going to be the swing issue for me. Quoner also brings up a point that concerns me some: how well will Palin be able to handle her vice presidential duties with a young Downs Syndrome child? While my somewhat latent motherly instinct cringes at the thought, I don't think this is a reason to vote or not vote for Palin. Like her pretty face, her abilities as a mother have nothing to do with her abilities to run a country. (Unless, of course, one of her children is running a meth lab at her house, or something like that.) In my opinion, the U.S. president should be well-spoken, intelligent, discreet, decisive, and considerate. Although the buck ultimately stops with the President, he or she does not often have the power to do more than express concern or frustration over an event. For the past four years, the public has lamented the fact that Washington is filled with disconnected oligarchs who have no idea what their consituents believe and serve only for the accolades and wealth. It seems to me that both Palin, and Obama to some degree, represent what Americans have been searching for: an outsider. While Obama is certainly more 'in' than Palin in terms of knowing the Washington game, he's still a rather junior member. So my voting points boil down to this (in both the president and vice president): 1. Is the candidate well-spoken and can he/she hold worldwide respect? 2. Is the candidate honest? 3. Will the candidate, when the need arises (and it most likely will occur twice in this next term), appoint Supreme Court justices who will fairly review laws for the good of our country? Thus far, I haven't seen enough of any of the candidates to make my decision.

Forevereagle and I will be there with 6 others, including UNTFan23.

The result of an editor trying alliteration and not paying attention to the meaning. It bothers me too, but I've learned I can't expect newspapers or most printed media these days to properly use the English language.

untgirl04/forevereagle: Section F, Row 34, Seats 9, 10, 11, and 12

While I see your side of the argument, allow me to make a counterpoint. You are absolutely right that the United States is unique in our approach to education. However, I think that this is what makes us more successful. True, we may not have the concetrated studies of the Russian pianist who can play the piano better than any American. But ask that Russian pianist anything about his country's literature, or maybe even a basic principle of business, and he's completely lost. The problem is that he's in his own little musical silo and has no clue about the vast array of knowledge outside. So when that Russian pianist develops arthritis at the age of 30 and has no real love nor talent for teaching, what is he to do? The broad studies required in the United States give us the ability to change our focus at any point. Others have complained about useless knowledge in their studies. Believe me, I had my share of what I felt were pointless classes. However, studies have shown that different subjects stimulate different parts of the brain and require different methods of thinking. For instance, literature stimulates a lot of abstract and analytical thinking, while business and science are much more pragmatic (on a general level). The advantage to this kind of education is that whenever you are thrown into a difficult situation at work, you have multiple ways of approaching a problem. This developed ingenuity is one of the things that puts American workers on a different level from the rest of the world. While we may not be as highly trained or specialized in one area, encounter a problem and everyone is looking to the Americans to figure it out. In the 'Land of Opportunity' is it really fair to ask a 15-16 year-old to decide his or her fate for the rest of his or her life? American universities overall are considered the best in the world. If our higher education system is so bad, why is it that everyone is sending their students over here to learn?

There's a UNT Health Science Center billboard on 121 heading into Fort Worth. I can't remember the exact text (shows you how effective billboard campaigning really is), but I do recall thinking that it was pretty good.

I'm not sure I would put Brownwood in West Texas. It is a bit more western than say, Tyler, but they're in the same district as Granbury, and Granbury is definitely not in West Texas.

I could be totally misreading it here, but I think the 'Learning the words would be a good thing' statement was some understated sarcasm. I think Stan makes a great point: It's not just enough to learn the words - you also have to participate. We're still beating a dead horse with this one, but even if you teach the students/alumni the words to the fight song and the alma mater, it doesn't mean a thing if they never sing along. Personally, I think what's more important is getting the students/alumni to feel the words. It shouldn't just be about singing empty words, but about believing in them and being passionate about them. Although I know many on this board have spent considerable time, money, and energy dedicated to instilling that passion into the student body, realize that it takes time. I think the work is good, and there is definitely progress, but you don't convert 30,000+ people to fanatics overnight. Given that school pride wasn't the focus of this school for many years, remember that it takes a long time to brainwash people to that level. I mean, how else but time and lots of effort could you explain 80,000+ Aggies actually saying 'Hullabaloo caneck caneck' with a straight face?

I think so. Last night at the Cookout, Dodge made it a point to let all of us know when, where, and at what time the players are practicing. I could be misreading his statements, but I think the public is allowed in.

If you're asking students and/or their parents to foot the biggest part of this bill, then yes absolutely the students deserve the vote. As Rick mentioned in another thread, it's all about selling the cost/benefit to the students. If you were strapped for cash and being asked to just shell out more money, without a good reason, would you be likely to agree?

Some of them were, and some of them weren't. I personally voted for the fee, and voted for my Senators to return to their posts. However, in Arts & Sciences (my college), several of them did not keep their seats. One of those ousted was a friend of mine.

Last time, the Senate tried to overrule the student vote, and they ended up having a recall election vote to remove those Senators from their positions. Just sayin'...

That's completely unfair. I wanted to have the wedding at Fouts, but my husband just didn't want to wait that long... He's already 'RSVPed' to this thread, but I'll be there anyway.

I suppose it's just another way of reading. Perhaps I'm projecting a bit what others on this board have posted as well.

I'm not sure how much I agree with the closing statements in that blog. I agree that it is a shame Horton was unable to meet his academic obligations (although he faced some difficult family situations), but it reads to me like Philips is implying that it's North Texas's fault that Horton didn't get his associates. I'm not sure I agree with that. How much responsibility can we place on academic advisors in Texas to ensure the academic success of a student in Mississippi? It's not like they could go do a room check and make sure Horton was in his room studying. I feel for the kid, but it is his responsibility to take care of grades, and to seek help when he struggles.

Since my husband is preoccupied playing the game right now, I'm supposed to inform everyone that forevereagle is actually in the game. In the rotating pictures in the background if you choose North Texas as your favorite team, he's towards the back of the fan shot with all the painted faces. As a side note, my hand is in there (although I'm so short they never seem to actually capture me in the pictures), and that's my handiwork on the faces/bodies (particularly the claw marks on the bearded guy in the front).

Supposedly, North Texas has one of the top Recreation Management Masters programs in the nation.

I think you're misinterpreting my position. I'm not against any of the measures you mention - I think we should have an incremental student fee, a better advertising campaign, and an actual, publicized commitment from the administration to improve our situation. Where we disagree, however, is the timing of all that. I think that now is the time to act (we can have debates ad nauseum about why we should have acted sooner), to improve athletics. But only just now do I think it's time to act. My point was that before, getting the academic facilities (and the support of the faculty) was more important to the overall health of the university. The examples I used were from my own experiences, but I wouldn't dismiss them as only my rare exceptions. I'll bet if you took a poll of people on this board, you'd find other situations similar to mine. Don't we even have a couple of father/son posters on this board? You state that you're not sure if North Texas can afford a successful athletic program, but I think that I have been able to provide sufficient evidence to suggest that North Texas cannot afford not to have a successful athletic program. It is how everyone outside our university views it, and it is the main conduit for getting and keeping people involved. North Texas has paid a horrible price through these many decades and continues to do so. I never stated that I thought North Texas couldn't afford a successful athletic program. I stated that North Texas should not spend the money for a successful athletics program until they had some other necessary improvements in place. Again, I'm not disagreeing with the necessity of a successful athletics program, but I think that it comes secondary to academics. Let's face it - academics and on campus is how current students connect to the university. I met my husband there, found many friends in my classes, and encountered some fascinating professors. The greater purpose of an athletics program is to give the alumni a connection to the university. While some of you may be embarrassed around the water cooler on Monday mornings, let me ask you a question: Can you truly say that you would be proud of a university that has a stellar athletics program but crap for academics and academic facilities? While athletics certainly brings in some big bucks, many top-notch academic programs do the same. We just don't see it as publicized. I know, I know. It all comes down to publicity. And the fact is, that the perception of North Texas is that it's not all that stellar. That is (like I've stated before) a failing of the marketing department, and something that should be rectified immediately. But in fairness to the marketing department, it's difficult to show pictures of a beautiful campus with excellent facilities when they just don't exist.

In fairness, I'll try to respond point for point, because you do raise some good questions. 1. Yes. My sister, who has absolutely no liking for athletics whatsoever, proudly wore her North Texas gear to high school, and she definitely wasn't the only one. She'll be a Junior this year at North Texas, so it wasn't all that long ago. When I graduated from high school, about 60 out of 395 in my graduating class went to North Texas, but I didn't see hardly anyone wearing a T-shirt. I'm sad to say I didn't even own a T-shirt until I got my first one from Freshman Orientation. My point, however, is that the excitement for attending North Texas is growing. I've seen many posts on here about Mean Green sightings on high school campuses and even around the globe. Given that my first year in college was also RV's, I'd say based on my own observations, the number of students who proudly wear their green is significantly higher. And I'd attribute that directly to the efforts of Dr. Pohl, Dr. Bataille, and RV. 2. Again, I'd say this is a growing trend. My father is a staunch graduate of Texas A&M. I about broke his heart when I decided to attend North Texas, but by the time my sister started looking for colleges, he actually recommended North Texas. I hear more and more people talk about what a good school North Texas is, specifically for academics. I think that's a direct reflection on the job alumni have done with word-of-mouth (the best kind of marketing). Why the sudden spike in praise for the university? You can interpret it however you'd like, but I'd attribute it to happier alumni. I have co-workers who graduated from North Texas in the 80s and 90s. When I asked them why they don't support North Texas, their responses were that their programs had been badly mishandled, the classrooms were dumps, etc. I'd say this newer class of alumni, of which I and my family are apart, are in part happier because of nicer academic facilities. I still brag to all my friends about the spectacular rec center, and listen to my sister with envy as she talks about the new Chemistry building (I know, we're all nerds). 3. As for endowments and giving, I do think you can blame a good bit of it on the administration. But as I've stated before, that I believe was a major failing of past administrators. It takes years to overcome ill will. I simply think it's been too short a period to blame the lack of funds on RV or Dr. Bataille. To an extent I see your point about wealthy alumni not wanting to give until they see a plan. But what I want to know, is why don't they give to academics as well? Why don't they just support the university? I don't have that much to give right now, but I give because I want my university to improve, so that my degree will mean even more in the future. I give because I want other students to experience the same fufillment I got out of attending North Texas. It seems people only want to give with strings attached. That's not really giving - that's controllership and the very thing we scoff at Oklahoma State for. 4. As far as I know, the alumni association is outside university control in most matters, so I don't really see why Dr. Bataille would be at fault for this. This also goes back to my second point. Many alumni don't want to be contacted because they had a bad experience at the university. I'm sure people at every university have bad experiences, and I'm sure many of them don't donate to their schools. I just think that until fairly recently, our university has had an overabundance of either inept administration or overly picky alumni (maybe a bit of both). 5. As for the media, I'm not really sure why we're not covered in local sports. My guess is a lack of demand. Not enough alumni stand up and say that they want to watch North Texas programming. 6. In the schools that I have visited and which have proud athletic traditions, there are several buildings named after alumni. However, there are many more builds which are not. And from what I've seen, the academic facilities are definitely nice, or if they're not nice, they're improving them. 7. I will wholeheartedly agree with you that the administration has poorly portrayed North Texas and our successes for many years. I've hardly ever heard the administration talk about anything other than our award-winning music program. While our music program is quite impressive, we've also got the best Environmental Sciences graduate program in the country, one of the top accounting programs, a great forensic lab, an excellent school of journalism, and many other programs. I would love to see the administration step up and rather than tout us as a great DFW school, talk about our national acclaim. Our adds, whenever we do actually get on TV, suck. But I don't think this takes precedence over better academic facilities or competitive pay for our faculty and staff. We will probably have to agree to disagree on most of this, and in another 5 or 10 years, I might be just as frustrated as many of you on the board. But even then, I can't help but look back on how far we've come, just in the last 10 years and think, 'Wow. I was a part of that.'