Eagle1855

Touché, sir. Touché.

My preference is still Texas Tech or Oklahoma State.

Just pointing out that our defense was never really the great concern with this team. In fact, the defense and special teams accounted for a representative portion of the points in 2013. Anyways, I don't think my tone was overly negative -- just a bit of tongue in cheek. If it was perceived as negativity, my apologies.

Well our offense has only averaged the following: 2011 - 24.8 ppg 2012 - 20.9 ppg 2013 - 31.8 ppg 2014 - 27.2 ppg (and that figure drops to 22.6 ppg if you remove the Nicholls State game, 24.2 ppg if you remove Texas as well) Total for 49 games under McCarney = 26.1 ppg So we've got about a .28 margin to work within.

Yes.

UH has begun calling itself a Tier One school and believes it should have a Tier One football program to match it. They believe they can make the jump to the P5's just as TCU and others have done. They may be delusional, but that's a brand of impractical thinking I can get behind.

Whatever the star, this gives me a renewed sense of optimism for the 2015 season. Because honestly, until this news -- I had none.

I also agree with the perspective "who cares what it says, just keep them up there" because it DOES matter and it does leave a lasting impression in your brain. The more you see it, the more easily you'll recognize the school and the brand in the future. And if you guys want to feel better about our billboards, UH has some around town that say "I Choose Houston." As in, "I swear I'm not here only because I didn't get in anywhere else."

I understand this perspective. I have a BBA in Economics and I always felt both the business school and economics department were both highly underrated. I would like to see more emphasis on those parts of the school (ones that have the potential to bring in revenue, too). It's pretty well established Denton and UNT do arts quite well (an understatement, if ever there were one). We've all had that discussion about UNT. "Where did you go to school? North Texas. "Ah, the music school!" Well, yes... but there are other things, too. I'm not sure you can't present both sides, concurrently; I've just never seen a lot of effort spent promoting the business side of the equation.

I like that. All the "this is _____ country" stuff is stupid. Like A&M putting a billboard up in Austin that said "this is SEC country." It's just obnoxious. Take the classy route. Extol the virtues of your University. Make it look like a place to go to get a quality education -- not a bargain.

next step: phasing out his twitter account

We've come a long way since we were "the leading university in the D/FW area"...

Im in for a bill if the billboard includes any part of this.

We should just put up one right behind it that says "nuh-uhhhh."

I really enjoy this mentor-mentee relationship we have established. I feel like I'm already a better version of myself and a greater asset to UNT. People ask why UTSA gets programs to come visit their little slice of heaven. I offered an explanation -- one that's founded in the reality of the situation, rather than emotional "poor us" lamentations. You offered a completely unrelated scenario regarding SMU. And though I'm hesitant to continue down this rabbit hole (which apparently exists in a world where context is of no great significance), I'm glad to explain to you why SMU is able to attract teams to play at their place: 1) First and foremost, it's almost certainly a guaranteed win. 2) It's right in the heart of Dallas, not 40 miles north of any airport. SMU is down the street from Love Field. 3) SMU is an actual brand people recognize, not a directional school whose Division 1 status is largely unknown outside D/FW and the State of Texas. 4) Lastly, related specifically to A&M, it's well-known the entire Big XII cut A&M off once they bounced. So A&M needs games in Texas to continue to be a TEXAS program, first and foremost -- not an SEC school. I can support this statement by showing you their non-conference opponents since they left the Big XII. This gives the SMU's of the world some leverage. Additionally, they're an old SWC foe. We aren't. In fact, we aren't really anyone's rival (except maybe our own). Which is immaterial to this discussion, but serves as a credit to the my third point, which is that we aren't really a factor in college football discussions in the State of Texas. The rest of your lesson to me about how to have greater expectations is entirely misplaced, as I've spent most of my time on this board over the last decade saying UNT needs to expect and accept nothing less than excellence in everything it does -- which includes athletics. But again, thank you for all your recommendations on how to be a better fan.

I was actually just trying to offer an explanation. I'll work on my excuse-making and try to be a better fan. Thank you for pointing it out.

I don't know, is that what I said? Read back through my comment and you tell me if that is what I said. Because I thought I was commenting on the fact that that several teams already play in D/FW every year (or with regularity) likely preempts us from attracting said regional rivals. In fact, I think the regional component was the entire point of my post. But it's been a few hours. Who knows what I was thinking when I wrote it? The entire Big XII, AAC, and Arkansas all play in D/FW with regularity. If you guys think teams from the Mountain West are going to inspire our fans to fill the stadium, I think you're dreaming. No one cares about SJSU or New Mexico. Their own fans don't even care about them. Also, everyone needs to make peace with UTSA out-scheduling us in non-conference play because it's not going to stop. They've got the San Antonio market to themselves along with a large, centrally-located stadium.

Has anyone considered the possibility that maybe these teams don't want to come play here -- or find little value in doing so? I'm not suggesting that is the case. But as it has been mentioned in other threads, a lot of regional teams have DFW games. Certainly it's not just the AD "not doing his job."

I feel the same way about Muschamp's second crack at a head coaching job. I think it will be far more successful -- especially if it follows a coach-in-waiting situation under Spurrier.

It's a lot easier to explain keeping a 2-loss team out of a playoff than a 1-loss. Further, if you're a two-loss team, you've no reason to "expect" to be in the playoff discussion. As it stands now, every year at least one P5 conference's champion will be left out. It's going to be a factor. So yeah -- I would say it's different.

The cinderella story that is TCU (and Utah) is a unique one. The landscape has changed. I don't think winning the MWC isn't any more significant than C-USA in the eyes of the playoff committee. And I'm sure our fans would be just as good at not showing up for games against CSU and SJSU as they have been for those against Rice and FAU.

And I'm of the mind that moving to the MWC doesn't do much of anything for UNT. So barring a decade of 10-win seasons, massive influx of cash/investment into program, and a big resurgence of basketball success, UNT is where it will remain. I can live with that.

It likely doesn't matter what kind of season we have. We have zero shot at getting into any P5 conference, and there's no reason for the AAC to grab us when they've got SMU. Unless SMU goes somewhere, we're probably in C-USA for good.

To be clear, that's the only thing I was referencing in my post. TCU, however, somehow went from 3 to 6 in a week, after winning big -- which is mind-boggling. Not saying the committee got it wrong in the end -- just baffled by the methodology.

Baylor has a legitimate complaint. Their conference totally sold them out by not declaring them the outright champ. Head to head has always been the deciding factor. The Big XII got what they deserved for botching this entire effort. TCU may well have been the better team, but Baylor was the champ.