untjim1995

probably not...

No doubt--but I guess the question is if they traded places, would TCU and Baylor be in opposite positions in their leagues within 3 years or 5 years? I just think Baylor, which was a very good program in the old SWC, has been absolutely beaten into submission in the Big XII because the competition has been so strong. TCU, which was a mediocre-to bad SWC program, has seen its program soar in the different conferences they have been a part of over the last 14 years because they were competing against schools that they more compatible. If TCU had started in the Big XII and Baylor been in the other conferences that TCU was in, then I suspect that these two would be in opposite places today. That's my point--I think Baylor just hides behind the Big XII $$$ skirt because they don't have to do ANYTHING to pay for their Athletic Department. But in the end, I think TCU's success helps the school's image more, which increases donations and enrollment, whereas Baylor gets lots of $$$, but it has to have an effect on support from alumni and enrollment that could blossom if they had more success in football. Its amazing that this all comes down to football success, but the Flutie-effect has changed admissions for years and I think Baylor has sold out.

What really amazes me here is the hypocrisy of Baylor. I guess the money that they get for being a punching bag for the state schools in the Big XII is worth the $6million in bowl money and the attendance that those schools' fans bring to Waco. What's funny, though, is that almost every TCU fan you will meet would do just about anything to be in the Big XII instead of Baylor. I am just not so sure that if they traded places that Baylor wouldn't be at the top of the MWC and that TCU wouldn't be in the cellar within 3 years if that change was made. It is funny how TCU looked down at being in a conference with SMU and Rice, yet Baylor does the same thing to them. But if they would stop looking down their noses at each other--and some other state schools in Texas--they could actually build themsleves one heck of a regional conference that could have several bowl tie-ins in the Southwest. But again, Baylor gets the $$$ and the losses, TCU get the wins and some $$. I guess the real question is which setup is more preferable to fans, team, athletic department, and the university?

Very true--both can start there. I just think that the BCS money is the biggest gain here, though, not positioning themselves for next year. Because even if both are in top five next year, it will take one loss to wipe out any dreams of those BCS $$ again.

Don't fool yourself--they want the money more. If they didn't, Gary Patterson would be all about the playoff system over the current bowl system. Money rules here.

Since we LOST to TWU during the preseason, I am going to assume that games like yesterday will happen fairly regularly this year. I still can't believe we would lose ANYTHING to TWU in sports. I guess I should be thankful they don't have a football team--some of their women could probably push around our defense with lots of success...

Cincy would have gone as the AQ-BCS winner of the Big East. Boise State would have been left out.

yes

Well, when Sam Houston rolls in here next season instead of K-State, his chances of getting one win increased--slightly.

Yeah, I mean all of those Rice fans and UH fans have ALWAYS supported their team big-time. We could really learn from those fans!! How 'bout the way they supported the Oilers, too!!

If the AD gives Dodge a fifth year, it better be because he won 7 games and received an extension. If you all think recruiting is in danger now, it will really tank if we give Dodge a fifth year without an extension. No one would come here under the circumstance of not knowing who the coach will be in 2012. Next year is really it--we either go to a bowl or we get a new coach. Its the silver lining to this thing. And if Dodge gets a 5th season with anything below 7 wins from our university, then you really have to ask yourself if this all is really worth your time, energy, and most importantly, your money. Actually, it may not even be worth it all NOW.

I agree with you, but the question is where do you find the money to get us out of this situation NOW, as in TODAY? Its the chicken and egg deal--which comes first? If we had money, we wouldn't have Dodge. The alumni don't care about the university's athletic program, except for a hearty few. They have heard for decades how our football team isn't worth following, that it is uncool to even care about the team, and even worse to actually go to a game. Besides, Texas, A&M, Tech, and OU all play each other in the only conference that counts--this is the mindset that most college football fans around here believe in and it how the media covers the sport--excpet that TCU and SMU get coverage because of their hometown media coverage. The good news is that the new stadium will at least help a coach consider recruiting some kids that would never consider playing at Fouts, which is what most of the Denton ISD kids think. The even better news is that the student body that has gone through UNT since 2000 seems much different from the student body of the previous years. There is undeniably more school spirit than ever before--granted anything above zero is improvement--and I do believe that the student body of the 2000s will move up and actually support the program at a good level. The issue is that the big donors probably won't show up for another decade or two, as most big donors at other universities are over the age of 50. The bigger issue here is that when your local competition can pay a coach over $2 million a year and you can barely pay $250K and cannot afford to buyout more than one year of that $250k salary, this is the hard reality of where we are as a university, athletic department, and football program. It will get better, but it probably won't be for a looooonnnngggg time.

I do believe that Todd Dodge will be the head coach here for 2010. I believe the number one reason for that is money. But after that, I believe that RV will look at this year and say we made the improvement competitively that he expected to see. Remember, his words on this season were to see us get back to being competitive in our games. I can't say I blame him, either, since in 2008, our games were basically over by the end of the first half. So, in reality, he has gotten his wish, even if we only win 2 games. He even can use that line as a reason to say that Dodge will be back. It will also give RV a full year to prepare a list of coaches that will be available and will come here for a salary of around $350-$400K, which is my guess for what the next coach will sign for, including TDodge if he turns this around next year. For Dodge to get that extension next year, though, he must win 7 games and make it to a bowl--unless they are all full. I believe that his OC will get fired this year, but I also think it won't matter because TD is the real OC anyhow. But, in reality, Dodge has his son back as a sophomore, a stud running back, solid receiving options, and a pretty solid OLine. Most of the defense will be back and another year of DeLoach's coaching will make it better, just as it did when he was here under DD after a few years on staff. The biggest addition, though, for next year to be a huge success is not with the staff or with the players on offense or defense. We have got to find a legitimate kicker--one who can kick XPs, FGs beyond 30 yards, and can kickoff better than Charlie Brown in the Peanuts cartoon. It just costs the rest of you team so much if your kicking game is bad, so the biggest upgrade needs to be with Special Teams, with extra emphasis on the kicker. The schedule next year is tougher, although I HIGHLY DOUBT that KSU ever plays here, but I think the SBC play will determine if he gets the extension or gets fired. I would imagine it would be a win in 1 game OOC next year and 6 wins in SBC play or its over. In the end, though, although I believe Dodge will be back next year, it will also be his last. I just can't see a team going from 2 wins to 7 wins with the same coach and system that has failed badly before. But, as for the one thing that matters most, the financial benefit to the university and the AD will give Dodge 2010--you can take it to the bank.

How you got into this school amazes me...

Boise State has had so many more resources thatn UNT ever has had, it isn't even funny. They have a good-sized city all to themselves, as well as a state that wanted to support a winner. Plus, Boise State's stadium was a good size, easily expandable, and their city made itself a bowl destination. All of these resources basically combined to make BSU a monster--they city and university support the school with money and resources. Their conference recognized that a bowl game would be a good fit for Boise's stadium. All of that helps you schedule favorably. You start winning, going to bowl games, and recruiting picks up. Then, once you have it built up, you take on big-time programs and compete mightily with them because you have good coaches and consistent support. UNT has had a small city (both in population and especially in mindedness) to deal with, have been practically ignored by the Metroplex, and most of the state follows UT, A&M, Tech, OU, OSU, Arkansas, Baylor, and every once in a while, TCU, SMU, and UH. UNT students and alumni have had almost zero connection to the school, much less the football team for ever. This is even talking about the fact that UNT has had the WORST STADIUM to play in and watch a game at in Division 1. Hell, Fouts was a BAD 1-AA stadium. Its just not close.

TI Green--you and I seem to see things very similarly. I, too, believe the NCAA will stay away from a playoff until finally being forced to do it. When that happens, I can almost guarantee a shift like the one I listed would occur. Those big schools are not going to share anything if they can get away with it, which is why I expect an expanded MWC becoming an AQ BCS conference would be the easiest route to take. Yes, you share more, but you virtually lock up any "outsiders" from crashing the party ever again.

Army 41 UNT--20

Never mind--I will blame all of those mentioned.

That is a weak excuse--a score can still be given, even as a last second mention, without video, especially as the sportscast ends. Nothing, though? Someone has to answer this for me, or at least attempt to.

http://%20http://rebelnation.reviewjournal.com/blogs/from-the-editors-desk/coach-fran-should-be-the-man-for-unlvs-head-coaching-job It appears that one of our mentioned preferred replacement possibilities has another school (UNLV) very interested

Or the better lesson might be to not let the governor and his buddy that he placed as the university president pick the new head coach without interviewing anyone else just becasue he coached his kids when they were in school as OLinemen

I enjoy your positive posst about UNT, but you missed big-time on this one. Turner Gill will be at a big-time school in the next year. He has performed a miracle at a place that was as bad as we are now. There is a reason many think Auburn made the worst decision possible by passing him over for Gene Chizik. Buffalo will not get a better replacement than Turner Gill in my opinion. Maybe someone can keep up his program, but he is up there on the list for greatest program turnarounds in history.

That was my first game at the Stage in about 16 years. The need for a new arena is so evident, so I won't go on about it. Just glad UTA is finally getting an actual arena for basketball. Great game and the crowd was defintely into it big time. Why the private schools cannot see this on any level is completely beyond me, but it is what it is. After a great game, between two large universities in the Metroplex that ended around 10pm, I expected to see some coverage or a mention on ANY of the 4 networks during their sports reports. Nothing, nada, zilch. It really frustrates me--when TCU and SMU play each other, no matter their record, they get TV coverage. You can't say that the two teams are spares either, because they have both been to the NCAA tournament in the recent years, unlike the two privates. Heck, we have won 20+ games for the last 3 years. Maybe I missed something on the sports coverage--very possible, but I tried to watch all four and saw no footage, nor heard a mention from Hansen, Scruggs, Laufenberg, or Doocy. I just don't get it.

A few points on this. 1.) Yes it will be used against the university when recruits are visiting with other coaches. In many minority communities, gays are not accepted, nor tolerated. You can look at any poll or study about this. I once heard a black professor state, "Socially, the black community is MORE conservative than most suburban white communities when it comes to acceptance of gays." This whole mess, though, will be swept under the rug if this new vote doesn't pass to have two gay men or women as the homecoming court. Otherwise, it will be just one more point used by coaches to point out a perceived "negative" of UNT. Trust me, the current state of the football program weighs much heavier in the whole recruiting process, but it will matter to many parents and recruits when brought up by other coaches. 2.) The university really needs to back its SGA here. The issue was addressed already and that should be enough. If you want to change the focus of how homecoming courts are determined, then do what was just posted and make it open for one man and one woman. Leave it at that. Sometimes, I really can't believe we make it so hard on ourselves at UNT. And, in full disclosure, if we do allow this all to pass and do elect two people of the same gender to represent us as the homecoming couple, this university has seen my last dollar and my last ounce of support. The embarrassment would SEVERELY outweigh my diploma. I have already heard enough as it stand from other school's alumni to make me vomit.

I still believe that there will be a new version of the BCS forming soon--especially now that tow non-BCS AQ team will have to get in to their precious bowls. The most plausible one to me is the MWC just adds Boise State, Nevada, and Fresno State and becomes the new AQ league. This would really cover the ass of the current BCS leagues--and I am surprised that it hasn't happened yet. This would give the 7 leagues a guaranteed spot for their champs, with three remaining spots for non-champs. Before they added the last bowl, the big six leagues went with two at-large spots, so the whole thing is a big winner for the whole BCS. They will share the monies at a high level and can certainly add another BCS game if they want--like at JerryWorld or at the Peach Bowl. The MWC may be making noise now, but they will sell-out in a minute if they get added to the BCS grouping. The other plausible scenario is just a complete reconstruction of the highest level of college football. Right now, 120 team "qualify" as FBS, with 66 teams being "more qualified" somehow. Some of the "more qualified" really aren't (like Baylor or Vanerbilt) and some of the "less qualified" (like BYU, Utah, etc.) are . I could see a formula put in place that involves student body enrollment, alumni, win-loss record, attendance, and total athletic budgets to make a Super BCS. You would see a new level that is made up of about 60 teams and just gets to keep it all. They would basically be a semi-pro league. It might look like this: West--UW, WSU, Oregon, OSU, Cal, Stanford, Arizona, Arizona State, USC, UCLA, Utah, and BYU Midwest--Texas, Tech, A&M, OU, OSU, Arkansas, NU, KU, KSU, and Mizzou Southeast--LSU, Ole Miss, MSU, Tennessee, Kentucky, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, South Carolina, Georgia East--Miami, FSU, USF, Clemson, Georgia Tech, UNC, NC State, Virginia, Va Tech, and Maryland Northern--Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Iowa State, Illinois, Ohio State, Indiana, and Purdue Northeast--Notre Dame, Penn State, Rutgers, Cincinnati, Louisville, Boston College, Pittsburgh, UConn, Syracuse, and WVU Those 60 teams would get all of those BCS games and probably just play amongst themselves. Yes, they would dominate media interest--they pretty much already do--but the money that these schools would generate is almost mind-boggling. Its not what I want to see happen, but I think its possible if these schools get threatened. Hell, they could leave the NCAA and for their own coalition if the NCAA didn't cooperate. And all of those legislators in Congress--guess where most of them went to school? See the list above. Lawsuits may get filed, but just like when the SWC broke up and when the ACC pilfered the old Big East, which pilfered the old CUSA, there really wasn't anything that could be done.