Arkstfan

Just because you apparently didn't hire the right guy to replace a negative person who was half-hearted in their recruiting doesn't mean getting rid of them was the wrong decision.

No Boise and Utah won't both get in. Remember 10 slots. 1. Six are guaranteed to the six league winners. 2. One is guaranteed to the highest rated champion of the other five conferences provided they are rated 12 or better (right now that is Utah) or 16 or better and one of the auto qualifiers is rated lower than 16. 3. One spot is guaranteed to Notre Dame if they finish 8 or better (won't happen this year). 4. You can also auto qualify if you are ranked #3 and are not conference champ (unless 1 or 2 is from your conference and also isn't conference champ). If standings stay the same and Texas wins the Big XII, OU is guaranteed a spot. 5. If no one qualifies under #4 you can auto qualify by being ranked #4 and not a conference champ (unless 1 or 2 is from your conference and also isn't conference champ). As the rankings stand, Florida would miss the guarantee because #4 applies. Provision 1-5 will fill at least 6 slots and could fill as many as 9 of the 10 spots. This year 1-5 will likely fill 8 spots. After the automatic slots are filled you start taking at-large. To be an at-large selection you have to be rated 14 or better and no more than two teams from any conference can go to the BCS games (exception 1 and 2 are from the same conference but don't win the conference, wildly unlikely). To be considered at-large you have to be rated 14 or better. Right now I'm guessing USC, the loser of Bama/Florida and one of UT/OU get the remaining slots and there is no room for Boise. As to the Big East is guaranteed its spot through 2013. For 2014 and beyond it will be the highest rated leagues based on years 2006-2009 (because that's when the contracts get signed). BCS rules permit expanding the AQ field to 7 so if the MWC could hit the standard (and they did not in 2008 not sure about the other years) the BCS would more likely keep the Big East and just add the MWC.

Most likely A&M drags down UT's computer ranking while Oklahoma State lifts OU's.

Once again the spread crumbles in a key game. With all the wins Texas Tech has over Texas and Oklahoma I understand everyone wanting to run the spread.

I think its funny that some of the biggest complaints about the new play clock rules are coming from spread coaches. The same guys who talk about about getting in a fast tempo and keeping defenses on their heels have been exposed for NOT having a quick tempo.

What's the big deal about the transition other than needing a different sort of quarterback.... and receivers..... and oh yeah offensive linemen. For what its worth, the first two years of ASU coaching transition weren't bad, the third year was a disaster with only three wins and only two other competitive games (one was Ole Miss and it was the most important game for ASU because a d-back recruit visiting Ole Miss that day called ASU and asked if we were still interested in him as a QB), the next year we went to the New Orleans Bowl.

A good season or a few is always possible with a dump. Michael Jordan could have played some great games with a five pound weight strapped to each leg but not night in and out like he did. As to 1988. Lets remember that was before the full impact of the NCAA TV contract being busted up had been felt. No I-A conference had played or thought of a championship game. Note also that two of the schools UNT played so well against were on probation or just coming off it. One year after that Arkansas pulled out of the SWC because that league had become so screwed up and out of touch. Also recall that Arkansas State was an independent that year, we had pulled out of the Southland due to dis-satisfaction over the collapse of SLC basketball. We had nothing to play for that year. Also if you will remember you finished that season with a loss to a school making its second I-AA playoff appearance. Three years later Marshall invested $30 million in a new stadium, later moved I-A and now holds a 5-2 bowl record and has finished in the top 25 three times. 1988 was eons ago. It would be another 5 years before ESPN2 appeared. It would be 8 more years before Fox bought HSE and turned it into Fox SW. Really a different era.

No the current state of the program makes the point that the stadium is an urgent need. A few years ago one could have said, "Let's build it when it matters, we are winning as it is." That excuse is gone.

The state of the football team has everything to do with the stadium issue. When UNT quit winning Sun Belt titles was at the point when UNT had gone through years of recruiting head-to-head with Sun Belt schools. I didn't get a chance to visit your athletic village but I can state with total certainty that what ASU, ULL, MTSU, and Troy have to offer in the way of stadiums is better than what UNT has to offer. I think the argument is made that ULM offers a better stadium as well. Based on the photos, I'd say FIU offers better as well. FAU is still in the plan stages but they are the only institution in UNT's league when it comes to stadiums. UNT is lacking the tools to be successful. Good crowd Saturday night, outstanding crowd for a team that stood at 0-5. Right now there is still belief that UNT cares. For several years opposing recruiters could say look at the stadium and tell me UNT is serious about I-A. You might get away with a Fouts type facility in the MAC, but you will not in the Sun Belt. If the vote fails opposing recruiters will have their copies of those slick fliers and make sure recruits know the UNT community rejected THAT. If UNT could be tops in the conference with Fouts, the stadium wouldn't be an issue. That ship sailed. Some of the blame likely goes on the prior staff but UNT is no longer recruiting in a conference where the MT win over Vandy is easily regarded the biggest win in the league. This year MT over 4-2 Maryland is better than ASU over TAMU. Last year we saw three such games to pick from. You can't just show up and win the Sun Belt and the results are on the field. MT has our biggest win and they are already eliminated from the race.

The spread is like every new scheme, you get a period before people figure out how to defend it. Once that happens better talented, better prepared teams win. Spread teams score buckets of points against inferior teams in large part because they can't use a lot of clock, that same thing means getting slobber knocked by better teams at times, it means not being able to milk the clock trying to protect a close lead. Texas Tech is 2-6 against OU and 1-7 against Texas since Leach arrived. Mizzou is 0-5 vs. Oklahoma and 0-3 vs. Texas since Pinkel arrived. The spread like all offenses relies on mismatches. Most pass defenses can't effectively cover everyone while mounting a good pass rush to limit the amount of time receivers and backs have to get open. When ASU played MTSU, the Raiders loaded up to stop the run and dared ASU to beat them in the air, MTSU's secondary wasn't up to the man-to-man challenge. Memphis tried the same thing and has a much better secondary. Franklin's scheme might have worked at Auburn, reading between the lines it seems the players weren't buying his coaching and that may have been a result of the players not rallying behind one QB more than his coaching except to the degree he failed to decisively anoint a starter. However, most SEC teams are so good across the board that teams create their mismatches by flooding one point on the field with more players than the other team can get to that point to counter-act. The spread relies on getting enough ground between defensive players that they can't quickly assist when an individual mis-match is exposed. In the SEC you just don't get enough easy to exploit one-on-one mismatches.

I love ESPN360. Huge reason I won't switch to cable for my internet is because I'd have to give up 360.

Design it to be expandable. In college athletics it is better to have 32,000 seats with 1,000 wanting in than it is to have 34,000 seats with 1,000 unsold. Never over-build more than you can help it. When you overbuild there is no urgency to donate to get tickets and no urgency to buy season tickets and no easy way to get away with jacking up ticket prices because you've got more supply than there is demand.

Of course. But only if you no longer play football. Whether UNT plays FBS, FCS, Division II, III, or NAIA football it cannot afford to do so in Fouts because the stadium is detrimental to the image of the university. It is a giant billboard that screams, old, out-dated, irrelevant to those driving by. A small FCS quality stadium would convey a better image.

Actually the whole thing is very simple. Is FBS football an important part UNT's identity? If the answer is no, then there is no need for a new stadium. If the answer is yes, then a new stadium is essential because: 1. Fouts Field will lose its only competition for worst stadium in the Sun Belt in 2010 when FAU opens its new facility and honestly Lockhart offers better site lines, seating, and as good or better amenities as Fouts. 2. Fouts is not designed to generate revenue that can reduce pressure on student-funding. Whether the answer is yes or no it is in the best interest of UNT to raze Fouts Field because it projects an image of UNT that is inconsistent with the reality of UNT as well as the aspirations of the university. Across the nation university presidents and chancellors scramble to knock down out-dated, poorly functioning structures that can not be rehabilitated because shabby old buildings don't project a positive university image.

Cajuns got ripped by USM and haven't played worth a crap at home the past two years. They OUGHT to be good but Kent has been their only good game.

It wasn't that long ago that these schools were charging $20 a ticket to the 75,000 people coming to the game. They'd pay an opponent $150,000 to $300,000 out of the $1.5 million they would gross and they would net $1.2 million to $1.35 million. Then they were charging $30 a ticket to the $75,000 and paying $300,000 to $500,000. They'd net $1.75 million to $1.95 million. TAMU is charging $50 a ticket. If they pay an opponent $1 million they net $2.75 million. Texas charged $65 for FAU and grossed $6.3 million for the game and netted $5.4 million for the game. All those figures assume all ticket prices are the lowest publicly available price and we know there are more expensive seats A school like Texas will net more than $30 million just off ticket sales and roughly $10 million from the Big 12 (includes NCAA basketball money, TV and BCS). That's all before any donations, any sponsorships, any concessions, parking, merchandise licensing, selling any tickets priced higher than the minimum, or tickets in any other sport. To me holding out is a simple equation. If we get the money, we are better off. If we don't get the money and play more similar teams home and home, we are better off.

No true. It's Scarlet rather than red.

I think there is a method to the madness. Remember the last time three AQ schools finished undefeated? The one that missed the BCS championship was the one who played a I-AA. If taking a stance like that means fewer Sun Belt teams play three road money games or two road money games, they are likely replacing those games with home/home deals. Long-term if we are replacing a trip to LSU or Ohio State with a home/home deal with UAB or Ball State we increase our win percentage and follow a path designed long-term to improve our fan bases. If Rutgers or Mississippi State or Kansas State can no longer afford a buy game then they go for 2 for 1 or home/home. They might do that with someone from another AQ league, but they might figure their odds are better at Arkansas State or North Texas than at Ole Miss, Iowa State or Cincinnati. If we can get those games, our TV package looks better. Troy had two Big XII home games picked up and FIU as bad as they are get on ESPNU for USF.

Troy beat Marshall and Missouri and then lost to NMSU and South Carolina the next two weeks. When they beat Oklahoma State last year they were 0-2 having lost by 20 at Arkansas and 28 at Florida.

The conference mandates playing 11 games at home over a two year period. Home and homes are nice but if you've got to grab a check (and everyone in the league seems to need to do that) then a I-AA off-sets playing one or two money games.

The NCAA once adopted a rule that said games against I-AA teams couldn't be counted for bowl eligibility. Know what happened? Schools that counted on playing I-A games to help fund their program and who played regional I-A's on a fairly regular basis abandoned I-AA. So they changed the rule to one in four and it didn't stem the tide because the I-AA schools needed one decent paying game to keep their programs alive. I-AA or FCS football is supposed to be "cost-containment" football. The problem is that the basics of cost aren't that much lower in I-AA. Without a money game, it makes more sense to just go I-A. Counting one I-AA game is good for the health of college football. It makes far more sense to play one game and keep I-AA viable than it does to starve programs into moving to I-A.

2004 was before we swapped one OK program (NMSU) for a good program (FAU) and two bad programs (USU and Idaho) for one bad program (FIU). Troy was playing year one in the Belt and didn't face UNT. Arkansas State's returning starting QB quit at the start of fall practice to concentrate on baseball and Roberts was just in year 3 (ASU would lose in the final minutes to a then ranked Memphis making ASU 0-3, that same Memphis squad won the New Orleans Bowl). ULM was in year 2 under Weatherbie. MTSU was a year away from firing Andy Mac. The 2004 season was very transitional. 2005 was OK (made better by ASU going to the New Orleans Bowl) but the conference of 2006 and 2007 was very different than the conference in 2004.

Memphis has issues with holding leads. ASU scored 29 unanswered on them last year to win by 4.

BleacherReport let's basically anyone become an "expert" as long as they have internet access to post. Yes there have been articles by the professional media about the WAC's interest in going to 10. None have said boo about Texas and there is a reason for that. The schools the WAC is looking at are: UC-Davis, Cal-Poly, Sacramento State, Montana, and even some interest in Denver and some WCC schools to be non-football members. The schools the WAC talked to a few years ago to avoid taking Idaho (UNT, ULL, ASU, MT) would absolutely not get sufficient votes to be invited today because the rest of the league has zero desire to be in the central time zone. The WAC has encouraged LaTech to find another home and made it clear that they will not seek any team to help Tech's travel issue in the wake of their failure to find such a team several years ago. Since 1992, 1/5 of NFL players drafted from the WAC have come from Texas, a state where the WAC is no longer represented. Sneaky little stat there. It covers the time period when Texas-El Paso, TCU, SMU, Rice, Tulsa, and La.Tech were members of the league and all recruit Texas. In the 2008 draft 75% of all WAC players drafted were from California, none from Texas. The year before 46% were from California, 15% from American Samoa, 15% from Hawaii, one from Texas and one from Louisiana. From 1996-1998 5 out of 16 WAC schools recruited Texas heavily (UTEP, TCU, SMU, Rice, Tulsa) that's 31% of the membership. In 1999 schools oriented to recruit Texas represented five of 8 members. (62.5%) In 2000 schools oriented to recruit Texas represented five on 9 members. (55.5%) From 2001 through 2005 schools oriented to recruit Texas represented 5 of 10 members. (50%). 2006 forward 1 of 9 (didn't bother to see if NMSU is still recruiting Texas) (11%) When you see the amount of Texas presence the WAC has had only getting 20% of NFL draftees from Texas doesn't speak highly of the effectiveness of the schools in recruiting Texas.

Don't know if this is true or not but its a great story. I just heard that we got a standing ovation when they announced the final score at the Texas Longhorn game...not only that, they blasted the cannon after they announced the score...the first time ever Texas has done that for another team!!