untjim1995

Smatresk has been what I figured he would be--a godsend toward cleaning up the accounting fiasco and inspiring the university's faculty and leadership to be better as we continue to grow. But we all know who hired him. The same BOR and administration that has kept its dedication to athletics at arm's length--or further. I really wanted to believe Smatresk would come in here and really put his stamp on the direction of athletics, but I knew that if he tried, it would be really tough. Well, at this point, we have no idea if he even cares enough about it to want to make changes or if the BOR made it abundantly clear that no changes at the AD level would be made, so the topic is basically DOA now. Either way, it doesn't signal much is going to change here. The Benford situation is one to really watch--if he gets to stay another year or if he somehow gets extended, RV gets one, as well. It will be extremely telling if Tony Benford isn't fired at the end of this season, without ever finishing above .500 even once, even with some incredibly dumbed-down OOC schedules in the last three years.

Not at all--but it does reflect progress. Right now, those are the baby steps we need to get back to the point of just walking again. Success will be to see our program running, not walking, but for now, its basically been in a hospital bed for the last year and a half.

Success is winning. Progress is the term you want to see, which 3 wins would solidly show to most of us. He's a brand new coach, installing an offense that is 180 degrees different from the previous staff's offensive gameplan. He has a defensive front seven that is woefully small and slow, compared to most of our peers. And he takes over a team that MIRACULOUSLY won one game last year because the other team was playing here and using their 5th string QB, which allowed us to score a late 4th qtr TD and win the game. Butt-Cookman is our only game we will be favored to win in 2016. If we pull off another upset or two, it will be significant progress from where we were last year. Littrell's biggest wins this year need to be in our locker room and in the classrooms, living rooms, and coaches' offices at various high schools and jucos. That's what its gonna take to get this thing back up and running. Its very possible that we win 1 game next year, but if we get recruiting wins, it will point to us getting back on the right track. But if we aren't able to make those in-roads, then the next few years are going to be more of the same, sadly.

That defensive front is going to be so small, with no depth. if we get to 3 wins, it'll be a shocker...

UNT/Denton always turn out for old SWC teams. We will get 21-23k if it's a morning/afternoon kickoff or 24-25k if it's an evening kickoff.

Exactly. UNT, UTEP, NMSU, UTSA, Texas State, Rice, ULL, ULM, La Tech, Arkansas State, Southern Miss, and UAB Troy, MUTS, WKU, FIU, FAU, Charlotte, ODU, Appy State, Ga State, Ga Southern, Marshall, and South Alabama

Hope remains eternal, right? Its not how things normally work around here, but maybe this time will be different...

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but didn't we see a few months back in his contract that if a coach in a revenue sport gets an extension, so does RV? That right there should tell you what's up if Benford gets an extension. If so, there is no way the UNT 17 will let RV get close to that final year of his contract. Instead, they will probably just tell the BOR that they won't buyout Benford's last year of the contract, so Benford will get a last chance to coach one more year, then possibly get extended, as well as RV. If Benford has to get replaced, you watch how quickly the voices that support RV will come out of the woodwork about how genius it is that he didn't extend Benford out, so as to save $$$ for the university, even if it meant not getting an extension himself. The UNT 17 run this thing. Look at where the money trail leads--it goes straight to the access that RV grants them. The BOR doesn't care as long as they aren't allocating anything more to the program than they have to, so if 17 "mega" donors want to own the entire program and keep the carnival barker that sold them the snake oil, known as "vision", around, that's how it will go. Known costs and known revenues--that is how it works here, regarding athletic funding and expectations.

And the beat goes on...

fify

I'm looking particularly forward to the "McNulty and Metamucil Offense" portion of the meeting where bubble screens and constant run plays to ensure that you can punt will be meticulously described in great detail...

I would imagine that this will be the beginning of several G5 conferences looking at their membership and seeing where value lies and where it doesn't. NMSU and Idaho gave the SBC nothing--no TV, no decent travel, no bowl revenue...just gave them a ton of cost. NMSU and Idaho really ought to just give up on FBS football. Decide if FCS is what you want and go from there. NMSU could join the Southland and Idaho can go back to the Big Sky. IN the years ahead, if these conferences won't align geographically, this type of thing will happen more often. Right now, CUSA stretches from El Paso to Virginia. There is no way that UTEP gives ODU (or vice versa) any major benefit of being aligned together in a conference, nor does Texas State and Appalachian State in the SBC. At some point, this type of setup will mercifully end. As I have said before, the MWC and MAC both have their geographic setup done perfectly, split between even divisions, based on geography. The SBCUSAAC could certainly help themselves immensely for the long-term if they would stop letting certain schools look down on other schools in their state and region to the point of keeping them away from being conference mates (see SMU and La Tech as major examples here).

Haven't you reached the bottom of the barrel when a fan of an FCS school comes over to your fan site and tells you to watch out for another FCS school on the schedule, all because he saw his FCS school beat us by 59 points at our place...on our Homecoming date? I mean, he is a very nice poster, not some Cougar Queen type poster. He is not even talking trash--he is coming here to basically warn us not to look past a school that absolutely no one in Texas will give one iota about when they come to town. We are getting sympathy posts from a guy who follows FCS Portland State, a school that lost in their first playoff game last year. They aren't NDSU or Sam Houston or some other school that has challenged for FCS championships recently. And we keep the AD who scheduled this wonderful opponent, as well as being the person who hired the coach that led us to the worst loss in modern college football history. To the UNT 17, thank you for firing RV's hire immediately after this embarrassment, but we really need new leadership over there at the athletic department, even if it means (GASP!!) that you might lose some of your access to the worst program in FBS right now.

RV isn't going anywhere, anytime soon. Smatresk has been on campus, working, since the early part of 2014. If he couldn't get rid of RV, that's very telling. If he didn't want to get rid of RV, its also very telling. The BOR makes it real clear that the 17 run athletics. And the 17 make it real clear that RV is their AD--as in they will walk away in a heartbeat if he got canned. And, at North Texas, we know value--we aren't letting known dollars leave. "Opportunity Cost" is not a term that folks at the top in UNT leadership ever entertain.

I think that the problem here is that, even with Littrell's pedigree, a great stadium and wonderful facilities, a very solid set of assistant coaches, a very solid academic profile, and our location, our reputation with Texas HS recruits is somewhere between "safety net" and "non-existent". Their coaches and parents only know us as a school that is apathetic to football, that supporting the program is just not something our team gets a lot of from fans or the administration. They know we are gonna be dead last in DFW media coverage, if we even get any, on Saturday nights or Sunday morning. The only way that changes is to have the administration publicly prove that the apathetic days are over. What we have done in the last 10 years, facilities-wise, is incredible. But what we have done on the field is abominable. As we see at Apogee and at The Super Pit, you can have wonderful venues to play a game, but fans won't come unless you are winning. And you aren't going to win unless you get the right combo of coach and talent. Right now, at UNT, getting that combo right has proven to be damn near impossible. And that is where the onus (anus??) is completely on Rick Villareal. All you are telling disinterested UNT fans, alumni, and potential recruits is that you are not committed to winning when they can see that the same AD for the last decade has watched us enjoy one winning season under the 4 head coaches he has led, not even counting Littrell. RV being the AD is merely the symptom to the bigger issue of complete apathy toward winning in revenue sports from the BOR and administration. So, even with all of the advantages that were listed here, none of them can be fully taken advantage of unless you fix the first issue. And its my contention that the clear majority of the UNT leadership, alumni base, faculty, student body, and local citizenry MUCH prefer that we keep our current approach to revenue sports than to change anything of major note towards how we both demand and fund a winner in those sports. The only way that changes is if the majority of UNT leadership ignores that mindset and charges forward anyway with trying to use winning in sports to become our primary window.

If we win 3 games this year, I'll fully believe we are ahead of schedule by a full year. Southern Miss went 1-11 in the first year of Todd Monken's tenure, which followed an 0-12 season. The following year saw USM go 3-9. Then, last season, they won CUSA West and went to the HoD Bowl. That's our path. SMU goes 1-11 in June Jones/interim coach's last season, changes coaches, and Chad Morris sees them win 2 games. This year, they should get to the 4-5 win plateau. That's what I pray we are following. As HFS mentioned, if we are firing Seth Littrell in four years because we still cannot win anything of major note and cannot fix recruiting, the program's FBS future really needs to be considered. Because it will be all too obvious that this level of play just isn't one we can compete at if we are looking back in 2019 and saying we had 1 winning season in the last 15 years and a total of 4 winning seasons in nearly 25 years of FBS play.

This is who I hope and pray we follow, in terms of getting rebuilt again. They bottomed out at 0-12 under Ellis Johnson in his first season and immediately fired him. The next year, they hired Todd Monken, who won 1 game in his first year, 3 in the next year (including beating us in Denton), and then last season they won the CUSA Western Division. Monken has since left USM to go to the NFL, but that success caught the eye of other football coaches and should help USM to get their program stabilized enough to avoid any drastic drops again, like they felt under Ellis Johnson.

I would love to go out west to play, just to follow in TCU's footsteps by playing better-known college teams with Texas HS talent. But, for now, we would have to pray that the MWC would look past our hideous warts and decide to give a giant school in Texas the benefit of the doubt and give us a shot. That just isn't going to happen anytime soon, with the losing we have, the lack of attendance, and the unknown of if anyone would even want UNT in their conference within the MWC. The Big XII is the key here. When it falls apart, which should be anytime within the next 5-10 years, there is going to be a gigantic wave of G5 realignment. It could be the Big XII keeps up as a G5 conference, with TCU, Baylor, and ISU in the league, and they add Tulsa, SMU, UH, Memphis, Tulane, NIU, UTEP, UTSA, and La Tech. That would leave the MWC and the AAC with a few decisions to make. If they want back in Texas, do they go after Rice and us? If not, the MWC stays at 12, the Big 12 goes back to 12, the MAC goes back to 12, and the AAC adds whoever they feel makes sense for them. Assuming that Cincy, UConn, USF, UCF, Temple, ECU, and Navy stay in the AAC, that leaves them needing 5 spots. If they stay east only, then they would add Marshall, WKU, MUTS, an F_U, and probably UMass. If that occurred, then CUSA probably keeps UNT and Rice, adds in NMSU and Texas State, as well as ULL and Arky State in the west, combining with USM, UAB, leftover F_U, Charlotte, Old Dominion, and probably a school like Georgia State, since they are in Atlanta and the CUSA officials like schools that they believe can deliver a large metro area (even though nothing shows they ever do).

Not Really. We won that game when they rolled out their 4th and 5th string QBs and won in the 4th quarter, allowing us to go 1-11. UTSA still won 4 games last year. IF they played their 4th string QB all game long, we probably lose. If we played that game in San Antonio, we definitely would have lost. FCS Portland State, 66-7, cemented our asses to the bottom of the FBS totem pole in 2015. Hopefully, in 2016, we can avoid that dubious distinction.

UNTLifer, I complain about this guy on here because of everything you have stated. It would do wonders for this place to have him replaced, just to get a fresh leader of the department. RV is stale--as in stale saltwater, Fly...I won't attend another UNT sporting event until he is gone. And I have made my peace with this--instead giving donations to the UNT general scholarship fund and the College of Business. I am fully prepared, because of the way the BOR lets the UNT 17 run this thing now, to watch RV continue as AD for years ahead--and to see him get the athletic department named after himself. Its how things, sadly, get done here. In truth, FBS football, probably isn't the level that they prefer to play at, but the money from bodybag games paying for the entire program makes it easier to run the department than being an FCS school. That is what the schedule really tells me when we give season tickets holders games against Texas Southern, Nicholls State, Portland State, Bethune-Cookman, Lamar, Incarnate Word, and Abilene Christian at Apogee, not at freaking, toilet-bowl Fouts. I, too, don't like how heated things get on here about RV and that the threads get turned into anti-RV rants. In my opinion, RV is merely a symptom to the bigger problem, but its beyond time to get new leadership here. Until the BOR and administration SHOW us that they won't put up with losing games anymore, not just losing money, then things are still gonna be status quo. And I feel most sorry for Seth Littrell--he is a great guy, with a terrific pedigree, a man that anyone should be excited about to lead our team--but he is severely handicapped by our leadership. If he can turn this around, he is gonna be coaching somewhere else in the next few years, because people outside of here in college athletics know what he is dealing with here. But if he fails, he will follow the other coaches around here, being replaced in 3 or 4 years, going back to obscurity as a coach somewhere else. And the same things goes for whoever replaces Benford at the end of this season, too.

http://ntdaily.com/attendance-on-the-decline-in-major-sports-at-north-texas/

IN 2008, that UNT win at WKU on the last play of the game, where we intercepted a pass at the goal line and ran it back for a TD, which kept WKU from scoring the winning TD, was the toilet bowl. It was our one win that year and it kept WKU winless, as they would go on to finish 0-12. We have managed to win some dogfights in the past toilet bowls of the FBS season--beat FIU in 7 OTs by finally not missing a FG in 2006, beat WKU in three straight seasons, which accounted for 60% of Todge's win total in three years. and then this year's victory over UTSA here, when we scored a late TD to beat a team playing their 5th string QB in that game.

I agree on many fronts here. UT isn't giving up the LHN anytime soon. Its their advantage over the rest of the conference. Texas never gives up its advantages, whether they are in t-shirt fans, revenue, media coverage, or NCAA Compliance personnel. What the LHN does, for Texas, is give them a lot of revenue now, while also giving them options. Let's say that OU and KU bolt the Big XII for the Big Ten, as has been rumored. Texas could then decide to go independent for the next few years, keep earning their cash, agree to play the Texas members in the Big XII, then wait until the LHN contract expires, and join the conference they want to join the most anyway, the Pac-12 most likely, although the ACC will also be an option they like. I still think that OSU, KSU, and WVU will find Power homes, too. But If that occurs, Iowa State, Baylor, TCU, and also Tech would get permanently booted from the Power level, as the Big 12 would go the way of the Big East. We would basically have a new G5 league. At that point, finally, the geography of the have-nots would finally have to prevail, I would hope and pray. The MWC would be your western league. The Big XII would be your Midwestern league. CUSA would be your southern league. The MAC would be your Northern league. The AAC would be your Eastern League. And the SBC would house everyone else.

I think the MWC is equal to and usually better than the AAC.

Neither would the MWC. We are only in CUSA currently because of our market, which only opened up because SMU let to go to the Big East/AAC. My worry is that our football team's current condition is closer to the rule, looking back over the last 50 years, than it is the exception. Until that changes out, more than one winning season in the last 11 or 4 winning seasons in 21, the attendance won't be there and the conference/current level of football will just get worse before it gets better for us. And in basketball, you have to actually win a game or two in the tournament, not just get in as a 15 seed and get bombed by the name program that is seeded #2.