Greendylan

I'll take an unsolicited stab a these three questions from my humble view: 1. I can see DJ starting alongside Josh White on rare occasion against smaller lineups (or larger lineups when a speed advantage is desirable), but I agree with the sentiment above that last year's three starting guards will remain in tact--at least for the early part of the season. That doesn't leave much room for Johnson to start, and I'm not sure he should. It seems to me that his speed with the ball presents a challenging change of pace off the bench for opposing defenses. 2. Even with limited playing time, Holmen really impressed me last year. He seemed fairly poised, for a freshman, with some flashes of offensive greatness. I remember a certain game-winning shot that confirmed for me that he's already capable of contributing in a substantial way. If he doesn't start at the beginning of the season, I predict he will by the heart of conference play. 3. It seems like Edwards can play either forward position, and I tend to think he will come off the bench with strategic starts here and there. My question is this: What forward can replace Trammiel's 12.9 points per game? I think we have several post players who can reasonably be expected to compensate for the loss of his rebounding, but none of them, at this point in their careers, seem like truly dangerous scoring threats at the small forward position.

I love the idea, but I must lobby (probably unsuccessfully) for Fort Worth as the locale. Perhaps a separate happy hour could take place involving those of us in the western corner of the metroplex?

While still an outstanding athlete, Riley did not appear to have any ability to pass the ball on Saturday. Unless this team can suddenly put together an amazing option attack, which is difficult with no passing threat, then I think a QB with a healthy arm needs to lead this team.

Yes, thank you for the clarification!

Forgive me if I'm getting this wrong, but wouldn't contact with "potential recruits" be an NCAA rules infraction?

Based on recent history: We will immediately give up a huge play (probably for a TD) in one of Army's first three plays. Then, the defense will calm down, and our offense will begin to move the ball with some consistency. Finally, we will overtake them in the fourth quarter and grasp a small, tenuous lead. However, with their backs against the wall, Army will put together a scoring drive with ease and retake the lead. With two or three minutes to go 90 yards (there will be a kick return penalty) we will have to rely on the passing game to respond with a TD of our own. However, the drive will end dismally with a penalty/sack/turnover, and we will all bemoan how we couldn't quite get it done despite playing well enough to win. Dunham will sound epically depressed during the postgame show, and Dodge--with a hoarse, strained voice--will point to several key mistakes that cost the game. On the bright side, we will statistically dominate Army in terms of total yards, first downs, and TOP. This will give us some "optimism" heading into next week despite yet another loss.

This is awesome! I've always enjoyed Green Guys broadcasts in previous years. I know this has already been discussed a million times, but I would also love a postgame call-in show.

I would like to know if there are any concrete plans to upgrade the Super Pit in the near future: luxury boxes, central ticket box office, jumbotron (mentioned by Cooley), etc.

I'll go with #21 - Royce Hill. He was thrown to the wolves his first season, but he really improved last year. I feel like he could become a star in 2010.

So...it sounds like the Sun Belt beat writers unanimously predict this to be Dodge's final year. Out of nine people who professionally cover this conference, not a single one picked this team to even finish amongst the top four. You can't easily disregard this poll, as is the case with some, by claiming the voters don't really closely follow these teams.

Perception certainly does matter, and I have no doubt that the WAC does have a slightly higher national appeal than the Sun Belt. However, I tend to think that most major-conference college football fans regard all the outsiders with a similar degree of apathy. I just can't embrace this whole "the WAC is a springboard to BCS bowls" logic. Think of it like this: What Sun Belt team truly deserved to be in a BCS bowl but was denied based upon the perceptions of the conference? Some day in the not too distant future a Sun Belt team will end up highly ranked (just like teams occasionally have in the MAC, WAC, CUSA, and MWC), and when they do it won't be either because of or despite the conference. It will be because they made a huge financial commitment to athletics, have solid enough facilities to recruit premium talent, and made smart hiring decisions. Furthermore, because of the financial investment, they won't be playing two to three money games per year.

I don't mean to be negative, but I just don't see any scenario that places this program amongst the 64 most prolific in the nation within the next "three to ten years." Remember, it's not simply about being one of the 64 best football programs. What separates the AQ programs from the rest is how much money they bring to the table. It just seems like we would have to almost immediately expand the new stadium, sell out nearly every game, quadruple the athletic budget, finish ranked several times, and start producing the occasional first round NFL draft pick just to be mentioned as a possibility. Folks, a few years ago while watching us play in Austin, I learned that the casual Longhorn fan doesn't even know that we are Division I. Imagine what the casual out-of-state college football fan thinks of us? Will the WAC help? I don't know. There could be a brief spike in perception and national attention, but I tend to think we would still be worlds away from even receiving a cursory consideration. I sincerely hope I'm wrong!

1. No 2. No

Ok, teasing the common plebeians with bedazzling tales of the magical fantasyland VIP room is just cruel.

I do remember Carmouche's name being called a lot when playing against us. It seems that my memory serves me well: 15 points and 7 rebounds on the road (according to Yahoo Sports). I would say that he arguably was the second or third best player on a fellow Sun Belt team. I know we all wish to maintain high expectations, but this would really be a steal in my opinion. How many teams get to add the second or third best player from a conference opponent (who is immediately eligible) simply to increase depth on an already loaded team? His numbers and size may not indicate that he fulfills any glaring need, but this would provide another PROVEN option from the bench. It seems to me that our ability to rotate in fresh new players—from a plethora of formidable backups—when the starters are struggling is one of this team's greatest advantages over nearly all our opponents. Additionally, he would still be here the year after all our current starting guards have exhausted their eligibility. Yes, there are other attractive options (that may not really be options), but I look at it this way: Do we really want to see this young, double-digit scoring, Division I starter end up as a welcome reinforcement at ASU, WKU, or USA?

Ok, it looks like we are heading to Fox and Hound downtown, if anyone is interested.

A few of us in Fort Worth will not be able to make it up to Pourhouse in Denton by 6:00, so we'll probably just meet somewhere downtown. If anyone else is in a similar predicament and would like to join us, let me know!

Wow, five teams now tied for first with a 10-5 record!

We played Arkansas State twice.

I think it's a little misleading to simply state that we're 0-2 vs. top 100 RPI teams. We lost after very respectable efforts on the road against the #14 (Texas A&M) and #37 (Oklahoma State) teams. I tend to think that either game could have (with a little luck) gone our way if it was played at home, but that's perhaps just my overly optimistic opinion. Also, we played six teams (not three) with an RPI between 101-200, compiling a 4-3 record.

Those RPI's always frustrate me this time of year. We win a few games in a row but move slightly down because of the competition. Overall, the Sun Belt sure seems weak at the moment. Am I wrong in assuming that this is about the worst the conference has been in years?

Well, ASU needs to lose at least two more. Realistically, I would think they need to lose two of the following three: at ULL, home against WKU, and home against Troy. Honestly, I don't see any way they lose either of their other two games (home against ULM and UNO), but I suppose stranger things have happened.

Well, the article mentions that Johnson will be back next year after a redshirt, so at least Vito seems to think it will be granted.

I never complain about road wins, regardless of the final score or opponent. At home...that's another story, and I think there can, on occasion, be room for criticism after a win. That's just my approach to it.

With most teams beginning the night with nine or ten conference games remaining, I'm not ready to concede the west just yet. I know it's unlikely, but a three game losing streak by one team and a winning streak for another can dramatically reverse fortunes. For instance, WKU went from first place in the east to fourth in the span of about six days. Sadly, I have a feeling they're going to take out their frustrations on us tonight, but I digress...