untjim1995

Exactly--I was one of the few that had no problem with given Mac an extension after he had shown the ability to turn this thing around. He took a team that won 8 games in the 4 years before he got here and won 9 games in the first two years he was here, then followed it up with a 9 win season and a HoD Bowl win. He deserved an extension--just not thrilled it was a brand new 5 years deal, probably should have been a couple of season. That said, when things hit the bottom in 2015, and he had to be fired, we paid the bill. Nothing about Seth Littrell getting an extension should change the fact that we MUST be willing to buy off bad coaches just as soon as possible. Benford is the poster child for letting cost dictate what you do for running a program--it just ruins it.

This is all fine and good, but if Littrell's teams suck in the next few years, I don't want to hear that we aren't going to be able to do anything because he's got too many years left on his contract. It needs to be just like the McCarney situation, not the Benford/Dodge/Trilli situations...

I tend to agree with you. What I believe will happen is that the Big XII's two private schools, as well as Iowa State, are just flat-out screwed. K-State, Tech, OSU, and WVU, in that order, are who are on thinner ice. UT has the most options, OU and KU are next. Somehow, I think WVU, OSU, and TT will find a Power home. I am not sure about K-State, though. The MWC is the league that is in good shape for accepting new teams that fit their footprint nicely. They can get Texas teas in TCU and Baylor, as well as adding in K-State and Iowa State, fairly easily. If they get BYU back, Hawaii will get dropped as a football-only member. If the MWC added these teams to their league, it would be very strong again. Not Power League strong, but with enough teams and states that the Power Leagues will continue to throw them a bone to play them in both OOC and in bowls, with even a BCS spot still available to them, just not a playoff spot. The MAC is a lot like the MWC, a very regionalized league, with a decent following among fans. It is a low-level league, like CUSA and the SBC, but they have the right setup for cost and gate receipts. The AAC is the true question mark. UConn and Cincy are Power Teams that are stuck right now. Teams like Memphis, USF, UCF, Temple, East Carolina, Navy, and Houston are all power level programs when they are good, both in following and in markets to provide for TV. The problem, though, is the distance between Houston/Dallas/Tulsa/New Orleans to go to Connecticut/Maryland/Philly/Cincy will catch up. Most of the AAC schools won't accept the idea of having to play in a conference with teams in CUSA, except for Rice, Marshall, and USM. And they have enough money, for now, to get around here, because the NCAA Basketball money they generate at the gate and from TV, still is huge for these AAC schools, which is completely different from the other G5 conferences. This is why the eventual SBCUSA realignment has to happen. The costs are too high for UTSA and Texas State to not play in a conference together, while still playing teams in the same geographic area in Old Dominion and Appy State. It would help our cause greatly if we were only traveling as far east as Arkansas or Mississippi, with the clear majority of our conference games being in Texas and Louisiana.

Probably winning...

This is so true... And in the hundred plus years of fielding revenue sports teams here, that's not how the university has looked at sports. The university's main windows will always be music, arts, and a "value" education. If sports moved up in front of any of them, the uproar in Denton would be huge. We have about 2% of the UNT alumni that follow our teams closely. Maybe that changes in the decades ahead, but I just don't see it happening anytime soon.

Which is why the realignment/regionalization of CUSA and SBC will have to happen...the reality is that the triggering of all of this is still 5+ years away, but it will be when the Big XII falls apart before 2025, which is when their GOR expires. TV contracts for leagues not named the B1G or SEC will continue to drop, unless you can deliver marquee programs AND markets that fans will follow nationally on TV. The Big XII has exactly three programs that do this--Texas, OU, and Kansas. Those are the crown jewels for the next big realignment. You get great revenue sports, great TV markets, national recognition, and good to great academics. Everyone else is fighting to ride their coattails or find a spot at the Power League's table. We know the Pac-12 won't take any schools that are attached to non-liberal agendas, so its very probable that the Kansas' schools and TCU and Baylor are out. Its possible Texas could be as well, but Austin's politics fit the Pac-12 agenda pretty nicely, even enough to pave the way to get the other Texoma public schools to go with them. I think this will happen to get them to 16. I think Kansas will go to the B1G. They get a western team to match up with Nebraska and Iowa, with the KC market, as well as AAU academic credibility, which is what the B1G schools all have had when they were admitted. I think the B1G will go after Missouri really hard, as well. They wanted to go o the B1G originally, but Nebraska took their place. They picture themselves like a B1G institution, plus it would put them in a conference with Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois, all schools they are geographically and historically connected to. That gets the B1G to 16. I think the SEC would replace Mizzou with K-State, to help keep a Midwest presence, and add West Virginia, a school that fits their footprint fairly well and would give the conference some roots in the northern states of WV, VA, PA, and OH, as well as also adding another Southeastern school in a state they want some TV, which is easily East Carolina. That gets them TV sets in North Carolina, which is a lot of subscribers for the SEC Network to enjoy some more revenue. This gets them to 16. The ACC has 15 teams, when you include Notre Dame. My bet is that they finally add UConn to their league for the hoops and the TV sets in NYC that they can finally try to tap into. That gets them to 16. And then its closed for Power Schools. Its my belief that they will still play G5s, but the math says that the networks are going to tell these schools that scheduling must be better, so I see them telling their schools that they must play 9 conference games, 2 OOC games against Power schools, and then 1 G5. We may be lucky enough to still get that bodybag $$$, but its very possible that we won't, either. I could see the MWC and AAC, along with BYU and Army getting those bodybag games, but the MAC, SBC, and CUSA could be in those games, too. No matter what, the MWC and MAC have their conference affiliations set up nicely for travel. The other three do not, but the AAC looks down at CUSA and CUSA looks down at the SBC--for now. But money makes some people look prettier than you thought and lower expenses and higher gate revenues may just do that. My guess is that CUSA and the SBC realign first, seeing two setups like this: UTEP, Texas State, UTSA, UNT, Rice, La Tech, ULL, ULM, Arky State, USM, UAB, and South Alabama. Troy, MUTS, WKU, Marshall, Charlotte, ODU, Appy State, FIU, FAU, Ga Southern, Ga State, and Liberty (who is moving up to FBS in 2019)

Do you like ESPN 103.3 or 105.3 The Fan ? I like Ben and Skin on 105.3 in the afternoons, but I still listen to the Ticket more at that time slot and all day, actually.

Out of curiosity, why do you not like the station?

I tend to agree on the fact that Baker just needs time to fix so much that RV and the university's leadership allowed to happen for so long. What folks don't know is if anything can really be done to fix the main issue that is the root of the problem. Apathy. You will never make any leaps in fundraising or increased revenues if your two major sports, football and mens hoops, play in front of crowds that average somewhere between 20-50% of capacity over a full season. It will take winning and laying out cash to pay for good coaches, while also laying out cash to replace bad coaches. The last part is where we have traditionally not gone, until we bought off McCarney and RV. If we are ever going to make money from winning at sports, it will be because the university's leadership takes this view at all times going forward. But the problem, of course, is that the strong majority of UNT students, alumni, faculty, and administration don't care enough about it or absolutely loather the existence of our sports teams. I just don't know if the leadership here has the collective cojones to buck the system they are a part of and were put in place to make sure that athletics doesn't ever take a bigger role here. I know the Chancellor doesn't. But I don't know if the BOR or the rest of the administration does in enough people to make a difference.

Fair enough, but I be willing to bet that both of those guys were still superior to the other receivers we had or they wouldn't have played. That's the problem--we can't get enough decent talent here to develop into big time players for our level of play, so we get these transfers from P5s that want to play or get back closer to home and we get whatever we get from them, good or bad. But they get to play because their developed talent is better than what we have on the roster in the eyes of the coaches here. That's the result of never getting decent recruiting classes every year. Until that changes, we are very wise to take in anyone who can come here and has more talent than what is on the roster, whether its a JUCO or a P5 transfer.

Man, this is so dead-on, its not even funny. This thing has two things that are attractive for a head coach--the conference is winnable, even with some bigger name programs in it, like WKU, ODU, UAB, UTEP, Charlotte, and MUTS now. It can be done. Now, the second part is that you have a great arena still and good facilities to work with. My guess is that we will (and should) hire a coach who has had success at Division II here in the Southwest. It will be a step up, for sure, for that coach, and he and his staff will be hungry. I'd much rather go that route than to hire another power league assistant, particularly one who has no idea about the challenges here, from fan support, media coverage, and the complete destruction of the reputation JJ had built here. I will say this, though, if the next coach we hire is an assistant from a power school that is known as a "recruiter", that will be a disaster again, just as it was with Trilli and Benford.

Benford has just been the latest chapter in the UNT Athletic Department Value Book. Jimmy Gales coached in his last year of a contract, rewarding us with a 5 win team. Vic Trilli was allowed to coach his last year of his contract, rewarding us with 4 wins. Tina Slinker coached here for 16 years and left with a career losing record as the womens coach. Todd Dodge rewarded us with 1 win in half a year of his 4th year of his contract, after winning 5 games in the previous 36 games before it. Now, Benford, has added to the lore with rewarding us with exactly 1 CUSA win in his last year of his contract. But I do think the tide has finally turned. When we bought out Petersen, McCarney, and then RV's contracts, it sort of showed that we are ready to change this path. As I have said all along, if keeping Bumford for a 5th year meant RV being gone, it was worth the trade. Wren Baker gets his chance to show us something with this next hire, in a sport he knows very well. We shall see, but this will be what defines Wren Baker's early tenure--getting this right.

As I stated a few weeks ago, this is the strategy that Littrell has to follow now. It is exactly what Johnny Jones did in hoops--he got a transfer from ASU if I remember correctly. Until you can build up any kind of recruiting pipeline with TX HS coaches and parents, you are going have to develop the players you are able to get here and bring in as many transfers that you can. As Johnny Jones proved, once you can build a winner with this approach, the recruiting pipeline here will loosen up and coaches and parents will look at us more seriously. Otherwise, its the same old thing we have been dealing with since we moved back up in 1995.

This. We lack the institutional fortitude to demand winning from the top levels of the administration and BOR for revenue sports. But those folks are just trying to keep a job, which would probably go away immediately if we changed our historical course and openly announced that winning at sports and paying for it will be the primary focus here. The outrage that would generate from the entire UNT Family would never let that happen. Here on gmg.com, we love our teams and want them to win as much as they can. We get tired of being around other grads from schools in the region and not being able to brag about anything, while routinely getting embarrassed when the topic of UNT comes up. But, make no mistake about it, we are the 2% of the UNT Family that cares. The other 98% clearly don't care or absolutely hate that we offer sports at all.

I am not sure what to say to this...I mean, if you think that a HS recruit wouldn't be interested in watching a team practice and see what they might be getting themselves into, then I'm not sure this discussion has much more purpose to it, at least from my angle.

It would not be asking too much to "try" something like this. And here's a crazy thought, have your spring practice on a weekend in talent rich Desoto or in Aledo. Just two years ago, a kid from Aledo HS, coming off yet another TX HS championship, was quoted as saying something like "I didn't even know North Texas played at the highest level..." Maybe a spring practice to a hotbed within an hour of so of campus might be worth it. If not, go back to our current strategy.

With hoops, it takes one guy and a solid supporting cast. We could easily rebuild here within a few years with the right coach and staff. I saw Jankovich turn around a 5 win team into one that almost made the NCAA Tournament in one year. Johnny Jones got us to .500 after Trilli left him a 4-win team in year one. Going from bad to average can be achieved fairly quickly. It's going from average to good that is the longer process.

I just don't see this happening here. For 1, their are too many people around here that absolutely loathe athletics--not just apathy, but actually hate it being here. Secondly, the apathy part is staggering for a university in Texas. Third, we have never spent money on athletics to be our primary window to the university--we prefer music, arts, and a "value" education. Something has to be primary and its always been those two areas first here at UNT. What I want is for us to treat athletics like the other G5s in our peer group do. In some ways, we do, but in others (recruiting budget, accepting losing) we do not. I'll always understand why people leave here for the P5 jobs that pay way more and that we will never financially compete with. But if we don't fix the winning part here, the absolute failure that is our recruiting will continue, which is the lifeblood of a program's path upward.

I realize the chances are 1/10th of 1%, but what if Benford got retained as head coach and was given a 2-3 year extension? Could Ernie and his merry band of the UNT 17, who have bought the Benford Fever and let it stick around this long, throw more money at him to try and save face? This group has to be so embarrassed by this all, but they could just double-down and try to give one of their last guys from their RV-led era to get another couple of years. Would the university's BOR and administration even care if that occurred? After all, they let this thing flounder and then die in 5 years and it didn't bother them a bit that the Super Pit was at 15% capacity. Again, I strongly doubt it would happen. But its UNT and sports, a combination that has rarely worked out well for decades...

#NewDenton sure has the feel of #NormalDenton at the moment...

The folks who were in the UNT 17 and backed RV for so long have got to feel like they got swindled...talk about a colossal waste of money and time.

If the NCAA ever wanted to hit someone with the death penalty, Baylor is the perfect piñata for the NCAAs hammer. Small private school with a recognizable name who is in a dying conference and wasn't going to have a seat at the power leagues' table anyway. That said, I doubt they will ever give out the death penalty again, but Baylor has had a basketball player murder another player, both of whom were being paid by Baylor's staff, and then this serial raping of Baylor coeds by football players being covered up, all within a 15 year timeframe. All of a sudden, SMU paying players $$$$ for a decade doesn't seem so bad... SMU and Baylor do have one thing in common in all of this--nobody gave two $hits about them until they got really good...like beating Texas on the field and winning conference titles, neither of which are to be allowed in the media outlets in this great state of ours, full of Texas grads. Remember, it was Texas Monthly, the UT rag from Austin, that broke this story. Amazingly, the Texas Monthly staff didn't look into anything going on in Waco with Baylor's program until they won the Big XII (again) in 2014. That's the way it has always worked in this state.

How many of those 8700 graduates have ever been to a home game for us? How many follow the team, even remotely? I would love this to be a part of an "exit" interview via survey when these folks graduate, just to get a better idea of how much interest is really there. And from that, you could target alumni for MGC membership, season tickets, or even just game tickets. RV sucked royally as an AD--lazy is putting it very mildly. I mean he got a little over 1% of all graduates in this timeframe that committed to the MGC in his tenure. Getting that figure to 2% would seem fairly easy for a competent AD and staff. But the reason I ask for some kind of interest gathering from the alums after they graduate is to gain an idea of if its reasonable to believe that we could see this number rise significantly higher or not. Its still abundantly clear that 98% of the alums, student body, faculty, administration, and local citizenry don't care enough to support us regularly, but again, if we just start with a reasonable growth plan and look to get a reasonable gain, we could see the MGC get up to 850 or more in 2017.

When I read this thread title, I was actually wondering if he was talking about some fans...

Congratulations on absolutely missing the point. BTW, Lubbock has about 250k residents. They didn't go to Odessa last year because they needed to get the oil patch fans to buy in or because their stadium (that is much bigger and nicer than ours) isn't "damn fine". They did it because it creates excitement among fans who can't get back to Lubbock, but might live in other parts of the state, as well as because it gives recruits the opportunity to come see them practice near by. For DFW recruits, Tech gets to host them for a visit at the Star in March, and then can invite them to watch Tech play Baylor at JerryWorld in November. On the other end of the spectrum, we create exactly no buzz with recruits who already look at us as a safety net or last resort, plus we get to host them at our facilities for the same spring game and a riveting home game against Lamar, Army, or other CUSA opponent. But, hey, UNT-Frisco will be a big deal for the system. Maybe they can get their own mascot, too, like UNT-Dallas...