untjim1995

In Dodge's first two seasons, we couldn't beat anybody that had a modcum of talent/coaching at the FBS level. Then, in year 3, it looks like we have the makings of turnaround, except that we literally gave away games at the end against Ohio, Florida Atlantic, ULL, FIU, Army, and Arkansas State, all losses by a touchdown or less. It was then that I realized that a bad team doesn't have to always get crushed to be awful...that can literally take losses from the jaws of victory against anybody, road or home. I still cannot believe Dodge got that 4th season to come back, but I guess the money wasn't there or the university's leadership just refused to buy out an extra $300k to get rid of him. Thank goodness Dodge rewarded us with a 1-6 start in 2010 before getting finally fired.

And that is solid progress if we go 2-10. We should have been 0-12 last year with what we rolled out there and how they quit on the school. If UTSA's 4th string QB doesn't get hurt and the game isn't in Denton, they probably win. Butt Cookman is the only team we will be expected to beat on the entire schedule. It represents the only game that would cause we any disappointment in Seth Littrell if we lose, but even then, I'd understand it. 68 scholarship players, brand new offensive scheme that these players are still adapting to from the Buick Offense of McCarney, plus a defense that is still undersized and slow compared to other G5 teams...that doesn't equate to a hugely successful season on the scoreboard. If we win 0-2 games this season, but we see fight in the team for 60 minutes each game and we see a recruited class that ranks in the top third of G5s, instead of the bottom decile like we have endured for most of the last 5 seasons, then this year will be a nice starting point for moving upward. All I'm saying is that if Littrell posts a 5-7 year in his third season here, he isn't getting fired after it. He will get 4th season to go after a bowl bid. If he falls short in that 4th year, he will be gone then. Now, if we are looking at Dodge-esque levels of suck here and he has won 5 games total in his first three seasons, then I agree, he will be gone--the university and the UNT 17 have made that refreshingly clear after the McCarney firing in mid season last year.

4, actually, but your point remains...

Its ok to recognize that we have very little developed talent here. You cannot rank dead-ass last in recruiting within the last few seasons, as well as have 68 scholarships and not think its not going to hurt when playing other programs at the G5 level. Right now, exactly one team on our schedule has less overall talent than us--Butt Cookman. Everyone else has more recruited/scholarship players than we have, including UTSA. Nobody says are guys are weak or slow. They are saying we don't have enough guys here to make up the difference between the 10 G5 teams on our schedule having 80-85 scholarship players. SMU has better players than us right now. So does Army. So do UTSA and UTEP. But its not always gonna be this way if Littrell and company can recruit successfully here in Texas and create the right mindset within the locker room. If they do that, we will look back on 2016 as the point where the bottoming out had ended and we began to rebound, The only way we aren't officially at the bottom yet is if we go 0-12. And I don't think we will do that...

This. And if we accomplish this, it will be progress from last year's debacle. If it weren't for miraculous circumstances, we would've finished 0-12 last year instead of 1-11. This year, going 1-11 or 2-10 will represent progress when you factor in that we have 68 scholarship players on the team before the season starts, a brand new QB, and an entirely new coaching staff, which includes a head coach who has never been a head coach before (ever)... But if we go 0-12, 1-11, or 2-10, while actually picking up some Tx HS recruits that other FBS teams want, then the season will just be looked at as a step in the right direction. Littrell and company get to take advantage of this season in this weird way--the on-field results matter a heckuva lot less than the off-the-field results, both in recruiting and in establishing a mindset within the locker room to become a winner. For the fans, don't get lost in the weeds this year when we have blowout losses--we are playing a lot of teams that have just been built in a better fashion for 2016 than what we have now. Except for Butt Cookman, Army, and UTSA, the teams on our schedule (even SMU) are just in better shape than we are right now, both from a talent and experienced coaching staff standpoint. You cannot go into a season with 68 scholarship guys from the worst team in the country and a brand new coach and expect for it to go real well in that first year. But Todd Monken saw that a short term rebuild would turn into huge rewards in a few years at USM, which was exactly where we are now back in 2013. They won one game that year, 3 the next, and then won CUSA West last year. That's what Littrell needs to try and mimic. Folks, 0-12 this year really doesn't give us one hint about Littrell being a bad head coach. We are that far down right now. Just give it time and be patient.

The thing about a coaching change is that it typically brings excitement and positivity, usually because you've replaced a coach who has been fired. A lot of people, especially media and fans, want to be able to say that they believed in the new hire from Day One. However, the reality that you deal with is that you usually see a new coach take over kids that aren't a good fit for their schemes. Dodge and his spread offense took over Dickey's Buick offense. It never really worked. Then, McCarney's offensive scheme was Buick II, taking over from Dodge's SLC offense, but it took a while to see it work out, but when those Dodge recruits graduated, we replaced them with very little talent, built for an offensive scheme that Knute Rockne felt was boring. Now, Littrell's high-octane offensive strategy has to put these Buick II parts and put them into his gameplan, realizing that he just needs to get competition and a new mindset going in the right direction. My guess is that the only way this works for Littrell here is if he can get HS recruits here to come in and fill in the holes in the years ahead. I'll say it again, but Seth Littrell is coaching here for 3-4 years, max. He either pulls off the rebuild and gets hired away, or he doesn't, like Dodge didn't, and he gets let go of with a year left on his contract. If the latter occurs, it would be so helpful for the next regime if they aren't having to take over a roster that is at a FCS level, both in numbers and talent, which is what Mac left Littrell and company.

This. It reminds me of the conversation I had with one of my client's who's son is the head coach at a HS in Frisco. When I asked him what his son thought of Dan McCarney and his staff, the first thing he said was how much his son liked them as coaches, especially Mac. Said he connected to the coaches with his personality and experience, and was usually very positive. And then it happened--"The only problem with McCarney, though, is that his offensive style is so boring, kids don't want to play in it, nor do any high schools run that offense here. Coaches can't even relate to it..." That's how you become the worst recruiter in the state, folks. You try pounding the square peg into the round hole--while drinking your Metamucil...

Just remember that when you see where we sit in the standings this season, even with Benford making his last march on the sidelines, it just means that RV is gone. Itll make it much easier to accept when you realize we basically chose to get rid of RV right away and wait a year on Benford since it was more economically friendly. Ill take the trade any day.

The only thing that I truly give Rick Villareal credit for doing here to change the culture in a positive fashion was get the university to allow tailgating--and, yes, that changed the culture, as more people started coming out to the stadium parking lot on gameday. But that was it--literally nothing else they did at Fouts or Apogee made it a special day for he casual fan, of which most UNT students and alumni are easily categorized. I think these things need to happen for this place to ever create a gameday that attracts more than the 13k diehards: 1.) Win 2.) Continue to focus on the tailgate scene around the stadium 3.) Find ways to spend money on promotions that bring out students and keeps them at the game. 4.) Never schedule a FCS game ever again at Apogee beyond the last one RV scheduled--and try to buy out as many of them as you can. Absolutely nobody cares about watching us play a FCS team, except for SFA or SHSU. 5.) Ask the Green Brigade's Leadership what they want their performance to look like for entering a game, performing during the game, and at halftime. But also maintain that the football game experience needs to be treated much higher than it ever has been before. If you get answers from their leadership that people are at Apogee to see them, not the football team, immediately make that public. If that is the case, I'm not sure what can be done, but it needs to be publically discussed so that everyone associated with UNT knows if there are problems in how this experience is being viewed. 6.) Give away tickets to the Eagles Wing to local elementary and middle schools--that creates noise and it creates buyers of concessions. An empty seat does nothing for you, except deflate the team and the other fans that see empty seats around them and begin to question why they are still here and over half the stadium's seats don't have a butt in them. 7.) Have a special alum of the school, no matter if athletic or not, come to each game as the captain for the home game--before each game, interview the special captain about their experience at UNT and how much it means to them. This is where you can get all kinds of folks to be treated royally by the university--actors, musicians, CEOs, athletes, professors, journalists, etc...How cool would it be to have Norah Jones take the field to deliver the coin flip? Or to have Lance Dunbar do the same thing? Have them interviewed the day before about their time here and have it play on the jumbotron and on the website. Here's a crazy thing that might just happen--one or two of those special guests might just feel compelled to stay connected and fund the program more.

No, it does--at least with me. But the culture won't change if you don't win consistently. We saw very little jump in attendance in the early 00's because they basically were running roughshod over a collection of teams in the SBC that nobody had heard of or just flat out didn't care about or respect. Combine that with Fouts being a dump and Dickeyball boring most people to sleep, it wasn't ever going to get any better than that 15k average. And as we saw, that was the ceiling, as the losing crept back in and we began seeing attendance drop under Dickey in those last two years. To me, the fix the culture thing is waaaaayyyy above the AD, though. Granted, the last AD couldn't fix a leaky pipe or a broken clock, but the AD has to focus on leading the department--the stuff like making UNT football matter to people has to come from two sources--the BOR/administration telling everyone that UNT sports matter and will be priority one for connecting with alumni because of the revenue it brings (sorry, not music or arts), and the student body, which has shown it cares more today about sports here than ever before. If we win, the students will come. If we don't, they won't. But its the BOR/administration that has to walk the walk here--that would do more to fix the culture towards athletics than anything else, because it will pervade thru the faculty and into the city. Right now, Denton citizens and the majority of UNT faculty LOATHE our football team--its what the students hear over and over. But the ones who look past this always come out to watch out first game or two--its after this that our losing usually torpedoes any momentum and they go back to hearing what a joke we are in their classes, dorms, and around town. If you get the leadership to go against the status quo in Denton, you've got the chance to make UNT Football something it has never been here. But, just as in politics, until the status quo of money from corporations and unions affects the policies of the day, nothing will change. Its up to the leadership to make it abundnatly clear thru words and actions that UNT Revenue Sports are the true #1 window to the university going forward.

They really aren't anywhere neat Big Boy Football, if you mean P5s. But raising ticket prices after this past season would be astronomically dumb. If anything, they may need to consider keeping low for like three years, just to get people to consider staying or coming back. People won't pay for a loser. That's been proven over and over--especially here...

The only way to get the kind of experience TCU sells at AGC, though, is clear...you have to win to get attention of your current students and local alumni/fans. TCU would still be drawing flies to AGC if it weren't for the winning seasons that Franchione started having in FW in the late 90s...and what Patterson has built over there is beyond any Frog's/FW citizen's dreams. They have it made now, since they are in the Big XII and get great support because they are really good and they play teams that people want to see. They were averaging less than 20k per game under Pat Sullivan, while playing in the WAC. Then, under Fran, they started averaging over 25k per game in the WAC and CUSA. When Patterson go things really rolling there, the crowds were 30-35k for MWC games. Today, they get 40k+ for Big XII games.

The big thing here is that Baker just gets his staff together to reconnect with the community and alumni to try and identify ways to serve us better. I think he can easily do this, just because the guy he replaced was such a lazy guy and had absolutely nothing to show for his last 5 years on the job from a winning standpoint. Obviously, losing has been accepted here for too long, but to not give a $hit about anything related to growing the brand was just too much. That Portland State loss just was too much for anyone associated with leadership of UNT football at the time to survive. Mac was fired ASAP, Chico was let go at season's end, as was Cosh. RV was run out later. You cannot schedule that poorly, giving the school a 5-game home schedule with a bye week at the beginning of the year, with a FCS game as your only OOC game at home and set it up for Homecoming, then see the entire team quit because they literally didn't care about anything (the team, the coach, the opponent, the meaning behind Homecoming for the school,etc...) RV's demise was that day, which is ironic. Because it SHOULD represent the complete bottoming out of everything associated with the football program. And Wren Baker, as well as Seth Littrell and Graham Harrell all represent taking advantage of an opportunity to try and make things better here, especially in the long-term. All three men will be given PLENTY of time to try and fix this--assuming its fixable here. Harrell will get 2-3 years to get this new offense installed and call plays accordingly to Littrell's wishes. Littrell will get 3-4 years to try and rebuild here, as the hole we are currently in is well-known within college football circles. And Baker will get 4-5 years to turn things around here, from a winning standpoint, as well as from a leadership standpoint for raising revenue, building or modernizing facilities, and scheduling. In a lot of ways, this is a fun time for us to watch the program. Baker represents a fresh start, as does Littrell. Everyone just needs to look past the scoreboard this year and attendance figures--they will both suck hugely because of the past, not because of either of them. But getting the right mindset developed, both with the staffs, as well as the players and fans should pay off big time in the years ahead. It may very well be too little, too late here, but just being able to see new, fresh faces that are both excited to be here is such a breath of fresh air. And, yes I know that Dan McCarney was super excited and optimistic, too, when he got here, but he was at the end of his career and he had a completely inept AD to work under. I'll say this forever, but Mac got beat down by UNT's ways and its leadership--the guy who was here the first three years was the polar opposite of who was here in the last year and a half, when dealing with the media, fans, and recruits. To me, that had everything to do with who his boss was and how absolutely little he did to help the program. Littrell and baker should represent a complete overhaul and change from this sad history.

Lance s a true gem for the role that the Cowboys use him for. Very proud of him and the way he represents the MG...

You are so dead-on here, its not even funny. Morris is a Mean Green Miracle if he can stay healthy. Immediately, he is better than any QB we have had here not named Derek Thompson in the last 5 years--and he may be better than him, we just don't know yet. But, without a doubt, he is better than Josh Greer, Andrew McNulty, Dajon Williams, Damarcus Smith, Quinn Shanbour, Caleb Chumley, and any other QB of the last few years, if only because exactly zero of these QBs listed belonged anywhere near a FBS roster. Hell, FCS might have been a stretch... What we have to pray for here is that Littrell/Harrell can actually entice a legitimate FBS Qb talent from a Texas HS to come here, as well as more FBS Grad Transfers, which is probably the short-term fix here until a QB can get developed from HS. The JUCO QBs we have signed have never panned out here as a season-long solution. We really need a Vizza-type talent at QB to believe in Littrell/Harrell and give us a shot--and then not have him get the $hit beat out of him to the point where he decides quitting football altogether is a better alternative than playing one more down here.

You worked for the RV athletic department...I think that pretty much tells everyone all they need to know about you. You take this message board very seriously...that's ALWAYS a great sign of maturity and achievement. I'm sure your life is just full of kick-ass activities, Snowflake...

I don't get into down or up votes, since it really doesn't matter...you know, since it's a website and all...otherwise, it'd be "kinda pathetic" to even care about what others think of your opinions. You telling someone to grow up is just a tad ironic...Ill let you figure out why, although I'm not gonna peg critical thinking as a real strong suit of yours.

Thank God, he's not from some mean suburb...

I agree. We have 5 teams we can realistically compete with on our schedule for actual wins: SMU, Butt Cookman, @Army, @UTSA, and @UTEP. I see us winning one at home (BC) and one on the road (UTSA is my guess). Obviously, we could win more than two, but I think getting above three means Littrell was the best hire we have made since Fry and it will probably cement the fact that he will be coaching somewhere else higher on the foodchain in a few years. BTW, I still will think Littrell will be coaching somewhere else even if we win less than two games this year--because absolutely nobody in the college football world see us winning more than two games with the depth issues of scholarship talent on the roster and the character issue that is being addressed now (hopefully) within the locker room to try and make sure we never have a team quit on the university ever again to the point of allowing us to have another worst loss in modern college football history.

http://collegefootballnews.com/2016/preview-2016-preseason-college-football-rankings http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/rankings/cbs/128 http://campusinsiders.com/news/college-football-rankings-predicting-teams-finish-07-11-2016 Looks like most of these look at us winning between 1-2 games this season, because of Butt Cookman and UTSA being on the schedule. I still say that 2-10 would be MAJOR progress from last year, especially when you consider we have a FCS-level of scholarship players around here, with a new coach and an offense that is 180 degrees from what we have run previously. We won one game last year and it took miraculous events to allow us to win that game by a TD at home. A win over BCU is the only game I expect us to win, but I do think we will beat UTSA, too. NO matter what, even if we go 0-12, and I recognize that is very possible, there is nothing that will happen on the scoreboard that will make me lose faith in Seth Littrell as our coach. What he is having to endure as a first-time head coach here is monumental in its difficulty. And he knows that this season is all about instilling in these guys a new way forward, both on the field and in the locker room. And, even more importantly, trying to win over the Texas HS coaches and parents that have looked down on us as a program for so long.

You forgot "blue collar"...

Yeah, don't bring that part up... UConn going to the Big East in basketball would be brilliant for all parties--and they can just do like UMass and be an independent out of the NE. At UConn, both basketball programs make the money for the school. The Big East is really the only non-football power conference. UConn would be very wise to do this. The current Big East looks like this: Creighton, Marquette, DePaul, Xavier, Villanova, Georgetown, St. John's, Seton Hall, Providence, and Butler. UConn and one more program, probably UMass, St. Louis, Dayton, or Richmond would be nice fits...

So? Everybody would bolt if given a chance--and will. The point is that we are currently in a conference that is light years ahead of where we have ever been in 45 years. No matter how unstable things are, its still better than what we have had. Realistically, the Big XII expanding is the only thing that changes anything in the near-term. And nobody knows if they are going to do that or not. The networks don't want expansion at all, making it clear that they don't want any G5 team moving up that they have to pay the conferences for, so they may increase the payout to the 10 teams in the Big XII to NOT expand. If they don't expand, nothing--as in nada--changes for anyone. The AAC stays the same. BYU stays the same. CUSA stays the same. No matter what, the Big XII won't exist for one day longer than the GOR mandates the parties to stay together, as in about 8 years. When that happens, the folks in Austin, Norman, Lawrence, and probably Lubbock, Stillwater, and Morgantown will find Power Conference Homes, probably the Texoma 4 to the Pac, with KU to the B1G, and WVU to the ACC. The other four are probably moving down to the MWC. And when the MWC adds TCU, Baylor, KSU, and ISU, that will be the end of the line for the two conferences that will have teams in its membership that will still be considered FBS. The rest of us, including CUSA, SBC, and the MAC, will be resigned to being lowered down. And unless the AAC or MWC somehow thinks gaining another team in DFW will be worth duplicating their market positions that they will have with TCU and SMU, our place isn't higher up the totem pole. And if that is the case, I'd just assume be in a league that has the setup of CUSA West and SBC Western teams, which will cut down on travel costs and encourage more regional rivalries, which is what the MAC has always enjoyed.

You know, CUSA with Rice, UTSA, UTEP, La Tech, and USM is still light years better than our old SBC days...

You know, its ok to recognize that the powers that be are just too powerful. The NCAA, the Power 5 Conferences and Notre Dame, the national networks and media, and their incredibly powerful alumni that power the board rooms and legislative bodies in the states and in DC that the G5s and FCS don't have and will never have are just too much to defeat. Yes, it sucks, but it also creates opportunity. The G5s can leverage this situation to actually win a national championship in football--not just get a top 10 ranking or a BCS bowl spot for winning all your games. Right now, we have no chance of ever winning a national championship. We serve one purpose to the P5s, as a bodybag opponent. To me, I'd be glad to see the day where the G5s/FCS are on a different, non-competing level than the P5s. As times goes on, our level of play will not serve as an NFL and NBA minor league, but will be actual college kids playing each other. To me, unlike the I-aa debacle, where the king conference for football was in our backyard and we could actually play with and beat them, but basically gave up... Today, the landscape of college football is so overwhelmingly tilted in the big schools' favor for recruits and coaches and that won't change because of the money. I still bet we would get very similar crowds and following if we are a winning program playing against fellow G5s and top-end FCS teams, and making deep runs in competing for a national championship. Hell, we drew 40k to a HoD Bowl game against a spare UNLV team because we were good. And I totally expect that we are gonna get this chance. Because the Big XII's future demise is within 5-10 years of occurring, the final Power Conference schism will be complete. Now, I do bet the top end G5 schools will be given a choice on what they would like to do--continue playing the role of bought opponent, while receiving a bone for a bowl slot against a power champ that isn't in the playoff. I can see a lot of MWC and AAC schools choosing this route, too. But I also see a lot of them not following that delusion and gladly falling back into the G5/FCS level of play that allows for more competition and less money.