forevereagle

Nope, complete do-over. Clock is reset and the play is attempted again. The only thing that this could be used for is to kill some time to put together a fourth and short play. Send the punter in to hit the board to give us some time to draw up a play to go for it.

Since you could multi-select, I chose to both keep it and remove it. I am in favor of it returning in two pieces. One for other sports, and one for politics. And never the two shall meet.

Not entirely true. You can project a representative sample from many different methodologies, you just need to understand the skew and work to combat it through setting a quota for different groups in order to make your out come match the population. This was never a good method of gauging public opinion outside of a small community. I was not referring to advertising, only research. Advertising is not my game, but you just need to understand the audience you are trying to reach and where they go and how they receive messaging, these can still be successful methods. Phone research can still be very successful and can still reach groups that are unavailable through any other means. Mall intercepts can also be successful if you choose the geographies that you are researching in well. If you are talking about advertising, see above. If this is a research method, not valid, never was. Did not read his comments, so not going to comment here. The net can be a very affective tool, but it has to be used correctly. Let's not single out athletic departments, many businesses have not yet figured out a way to make the net work for them. trying to turn the internet into a successful business model is very difficult and a lot of people have failed to make the internet work for them.

I am not discounting the power of the internet as a tool to do research. In fact, I am in the business of doing ust that. I am warning against self-selection bias. Those who choose to participate will offer a different opinion set about issues than those who choose not to participate. You need to generate your data based on the entire population you are polling, not just the people who want to respond. If you make decisions about how to proceed based on a biased sample, then you could make a decision that ends in disaster for you and your product.

Direct mail, email, or phone calls. Provide some sort of incentive to respond. Game day cash that is good for merchandise. There are a lot of ways to get to people and get a response. They already do these things, so why not add to them and get feedback.

While they may be a conduit to others, that does not mean that their opinions are in line with those that they talk to.

Ok, so I never said that the AD should not keep an eye on what is going on here and 200 was just a number I threw out for the sake of having a number. Thanks for all of the feedback, but I still don't agree that this board is an indication of the opinions of the entire UNT fan base. When was the last time you heard "according to an internet message board, the President's approval rating is 56%"? You also don't use the poll from a website to gauge public opinion. It isn't smart business. That holds true here. This site can help you gauge the opinions of some of your most active fans, but not even all of those are on this site. People have to post in order for you to hear their opinions. There are a lot of lurkers on here who don't say a word. To use this site as the best indicator of the opinions of everyone, that would be a mistake. There are a lot on here who like to accuse the AD of sloppy marketing, to use this site as the crux of your market research would be extremely sloppy. The best use for a message board would be to communicate with your most die hard fans and to find direction for your deeper dive into fan opinions. This site gives direction, not indication.

I am not saying that message boards are bad and that the AD shouldn't keep an eye on what is going on here, but that this is not the voice of the masses. There are around 20,000 fans who come to games and around 200 that are active here. The people who are on this board are the "true believers" and therefore more opinionated than most. You are selling a product to 20,000 and not just 200.

Let's be honest, Crabtree is going to cost more than he is worth for awhile. If he sits, he is out of the first round and the 49ers save some money and are under the cap. I don't think that, as a rookie, he deserves the iPhone money that he is asking for.

This board is pretty polarized. I don't know that it is representative of the people who are buying the product. Like I said, these here are the most passionate. We are going to be there no matter what happens, for the most part. So while our opinions are important, the whole story is not told here. There are a lot of other people who factor in that are not represented. The vocal minority should not tell you the best direction for a product. This board should give you a direction to look, but you should dig deeper before you make a decision.

Let's tap the brakes on that. Please do not consider this group to be a representative sample. As with any online poll or call-in poll or anything of that nature, only the most passionate people from either side of an issue actually participate. Those that have a moderate opinion usually do not participate in these kinds of activities. Look at any thread on this board and you can see this behavior in action. There are a lot of threads that do not have a response from most of the people who are active on the board. If someone does not have a strong opinion on something, they don't post. Case in point, me. I usually read threads and only post if I feel like I have something to contribute, usually a smart ass remark that is only funny to me. There are a lot of fans that do not post on this board at all and we should not consider that the representation on this board projects to the whole of the UNT fan base. This is an opt-in board, and in order to opt-in, you have to know what you are looking for.

Wrong wor...you know what, go with it.

I would like to point out that I responded first and smarmiest. The blame does not fall on me.

Technically, he is correct. all FBS teams are a member of the BCS, but some conferences were only told that to make them feel better about bending over every year. Kind of like the everyone gets a trophy philosophy.

If you can rattle off that many, then it must not be too uncommon. I would say that the majority of the time, teams only improve by 3 wins or so, but a quantum leap forward is not unheard of or extremely rare. Not that I expect a quantum leap forward.

But what do you do about Dunham? He is maybe the single biggest NT homer there is. And you are punishing him because of Junior and his irrational love of OU.

The inherent problem with this plan is not the 40 teams that make it in and do not want to be ousted. It is the other 80 who do not want to lose their piece of the pie. The bubble teams will be the most vocal. From either side of the bubble, they are close enough to the outside that they will not be in favor of this system. There is a vast majority that would not be invited or sit close to being out that this would never pass, no matter how the traditional contenders feel about it. And then, if by some act of God this does occur, then the price to play outside of the 40 would be so astronomical that it would not be feasible. This is not a solution, and would further the problem. This would almost guarantee an anti-trust lawsuit if it went into affect because it would be telling 80 teams that they have no right to compete for the best recruits or a championship at the highest level.

You must be very talented.

Are you really reading? And do you want it to be a pop-up edition?

I don't know, Nebraska may have something to say about that. Iowa too.

I think I understand your code.

Please explain this.

I believe I don't care. I am abstaining from the vote. In unrelated news, I like pie and believe that should have been an option.

I got bored, so I created an artificial stopping point. I didn't have the energy to keep going.

These political threads are all the same. Right - Here is my opinion backed up by an editorial blog/article. Left - That's just crazy. Here is a counter opinion that is actually correct with supporting editorial/blog to back up my opinion. Right - You are, of course, wrong. Here are the facts of the matter, backed up by an editorial from a reputable source. Left - That is just absurd. Your source is Right leaning. Palin sucks. Right - Well, I don't like your tone. Palin is great. Obama is stupid. Have I mentioned his middle name lately? Left - Every time you mention Obama's middle name, you are just fear mongering. Bush was a bad president. Right - You are just blaming Bush for the problems that Obama has created. Obama is a Muslim and is not a US citizen. Left - Now, that is not true and you know it. I will not even respond to that beyond what I have already said. Why do you have to lie? You have a stupid face! Right - So do you! Thread Locked. Do we really need to continue the pattern?