untjim1995

3 wins is the O/U line to me on if he stays or not. If the program makes progress and doesn't get blown out by SBC teams, I believe he will stay. If we cannot keep FAU, Troy, Ark State, and the MUTS from beating us by less than 3 TDs, I think he will be probably be let go--if the athleic department can afford it, which is the big question.

I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that the MAC will fall considerably in the next few years. Just like the Big Ten, the cities that make up the MAC are dying up there and the growth is moving away from Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois, etc. The southern and western states will see their numbers continue to boom because the growth is already there and more is coming. The best non-AQ leagues are out west and the best BCS AQ leagues are in the southeast and southwest. I just don't see how the MAC schools will not get hurt by this reality--and substantially.

I will go with 3-9--I see us beating WKU, ULM, and either Ohio or Army.

I went to the scrimmage today, which was my first time to see this year's team. I am curious to hear what others thought that attended. In my opinion, Rodge didn't have a very good session--that could be for any number of reasons, but the defense looked strong. Very good pass rush. Hopefully, this is the season that "worst college football defense" is not mentioned with North Texas anymore.

Well, I think we can sort of understand the media thing. Basically, down here, if you are not Big XII, then you matter very little to the media and casual fans. If you are not a former SWC team, you matter even less. As for Brady, I think ASU got a good hire in him--don't get me wrong. I just think he needs this ASU gig to go well to build up his reputation again. Also, I think that the coach at UALR, Shields, is a heckuva coach and could make some moves upward if they make it to the NCAAs.

Funny thing about that LSU team that made the Final Four with Tyrus Thomas and Big Baby. I had a friend who was an Arkansas grad and another Miss. State alum who we knew that both told me that when LSU made the Final Four, ti was the best thing that could happen tot he rest of the SEC. Once it happened, Brady was going to receive an extension for sure. He was known for being such an underacheiving coach at LSU with so much talent, that even most LSU fans couldn't stand him. Of course, the extension came, LSU sucked the next two years, and Brady got fired (but he got a lot of bucks to walk out of the door b/c of that extension). Only Gottfired at Alabama had a worse reputation when it came to underachievement with the talent that was on the roster every year--and he went to an Elite Eight, as well and then got fired a few years later. I doubt very seriously that anyone is quaking in their boots here in the SBC that John Brady is now coaching in Jonesboro.

I want to think that, but then I remember that we are starting a freshman at QB and that our defense was the worst in football the last two years. I can see where we improve GREATLY and win 3 games this year. Will that get us off the Bottom 10 list??--probably, but I guess it would depend on who we beat. I will say this, if we have two wins or less, Bottom 10 will be a definite and Dodge will be gone (unless we cannot afford to let him go).

I went and read the coverage of the SBC on the CBS website. Saddest part of it all was that, although the coverage was pretty good, the number of posts and replies at the bottom were extremely small. In other wrods, not much fan feedback. Even when other mid-majors like the WAC or CUSA have coverage like this, fans of that conference and other college fans will talk about it at great length. Apparently, the Sunbelt, although improving greatly, still doesn't command much interest--even from its own teams' fans.

I agree here--I see 2-3 wins. I think we beat WKU for sure and then we win 1 or 2 against ULM, Army, ULL, and Ohio. I think we get beat by BSU, FIU, FAU, MTSU, Troy, and Arkansas State. And, of course, I think Alabama will score at least 60 on us. I think 3 wins keeps Dodge here.

Remember that SMU team was absolutley terrible, too. Yes, the offense was great that night, but that was against a team that only won one game in the entire year, IIRC. And, yes, Troy dominated us that day. Of course, so did winless FIU, too.

I do believe that when the next shift takes place in college football, the big BCS schools will either create a super BCS or separate from the NCAA to set up their own affiliation. I could see some BCS private schools like Baylor, Wake, Vandy, Duke, and Northwestern being relegated down. Big public universities with large enrollments and large alumni bases, along with the private schools like ND, USC, BYU, and Boston College will stay up. It would all look something like this: Western League--USC, UCLA, UA, ASU, WSU, UW, Oregon, Oregon State, Cal, Stanford, BYU, and Utah Midwest League--Texas, Tech, A&M, OU, OSU, Arkansas, KU, K-State, Mizzou, Nebraska, Colorado, Iowa State Southeastern--Miami, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, LSU, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Clemson, South Florida, Tennessee Upper Midwest--Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Louisville, Cincinnati Atlantic Coast--North Carolina, NC State, UVa, Va Tech, WVU, Kentucky, Maryland, Penn State, Pitt, Rutgers, Boston College, Connecticut There are other teams, like UCF, Memphis, Boise State, or Fresno that could also move up in these talks, but you get the idea.

I do think we will have some improvement on the defensive end of the ball. I don't think the offense is going to be much better than it has been. I think Rodge will put up big yardage numbers, but I think it will be because we will have to pass a lot trying to catch up. Plus, he will have growing pains, too. I just haven't seen this offense get to the end zone like I expected it to (sans Navy) against good teams. If the defense and special teams are improved, though, I expect to be able to compete with the bottom-rung teams in the SBC (i.e. FIU, WKU, ULM, etc.) and Army. I think we could be improved significantly as a team this year, but we were just so bad last year that I just can't see more than 3 wins. The real question is if 3 wins would be enough to convince the administration to change coaches. I just don't know if the money is there right now. I can see a scenario where Dodge is the coach through our last year at Fouts, but the university uses the new stadium as a springboard to make a coaching "splash". I guess we'll see.

Funny, that is also what I thought when I saw his name, too. Did you notice that the top two non-AQ BCS coaches were Jones at SMU and Patterson at TCU? Its tough being the poor guy at the party, especially when its in your own backyard. Then again, its nothing new, either.

How many people showed up? How many were expected?

If 32,000 people come out to watch 1-11 SMU play SFA, the economy is doing much better than I thought...

I disagree completely on the championship front. That derailed a great Ball State season last year because of a meaningless championship game. The WAC gets tons more legitimacy for sending teams to BCS games than holding a championship game. Same goes for the MWC. Don't give your undefeated team another chance to get knocked out of the mix. Hell, Boise deserved to be in a BCS game last year over Ohio State, but the computers got them in the end. Another game against Fresno State or La Tech would have hurt them even more if they won because those other WAC teams were not highly rated. And speaking of Ohio State, has there been any team/conference that has benefited more from NOT having a conference championship game than the Big Ten and OSU? They get into three BCS games in a row because they are done playing early while all the other conferences are still beating each other up.

Why? If that was the case, then they shouldn't even cover the athletic department.

I agree, Quoner. I just get fed up with it too.

Your post is the winner here--if someone thinks that we would have beaten A&M during that year, they are high. Our offensive philosphy would have been to run the ball every down and we would have been lucky to score a touchdown against them. Except for the Baylor game in 2003, name the other OOC BCS school we played under Dickey where we scored more than two TDs? Of the top of my head, I cant think of one.

I grew up in FW and watched a lot of bad TCU football for many years in the SWC. Of course, TCU has had lots of advantages for being in FW--they are the town's team and they had amazing success in football from the 30's thru the 50's, so history was on their side. It never hurt, either, that Texas, A&M, Arky, Tech, Baylor, and SMU brought big crowds over there to basically fund their program for years down the road. Their athletic endowment fund is very large (like Rice) and they never had to really compete for fans like UNT has had to forever. Then, of course, TCU gets kicked from the SWC and makes their way pretty well in every conference they have been in since then because they have been able to compete with schools that are much more alike in budget and stature. But being in a conference with schools that you can compete with is key to moving upward. If you cannot compete with SBC schools--and FIU beating us soundly two years in a row tells us this--even moving up to CUSA competition for UNT right now would not be feasible because the conference knows we aren't ready for that level yet, like Troy, MTSU, or FAU are at the moment. Look at TCU--they get into the WAC, hire Fran, beat USC in the Sun Bowl, move up to CUSA. They beat ranked schools and do very well in CUSA and the MWC (the mother of all non-AQ leagues) comes calling. The key is winning--but the lock is money, history, and coaching. TCU has all three, SMU has had all three before, we haven't. Only way we can change this is to win the SBC while playing in a new stadium and enjoying the new athletic fee. If any of those don't happen, we will always be where we are on the food chain.

What makes you think that? The article said both games are to be played up there. I don't understand how you can't get a 2 for 1 with Iowa. ULL and FAU get Minnesota to travel down there as part of their series. MTSU gets Maryland to go to Murfreesboro, but we can't get Iowa to come down here for a game in the hotbed of recruiting and, supposedly, a new stadium will be here. Its stuff like this that makes people wonder why UNT plays football at a D-1 level.

How is it that in the football forum, where the moderator is actually asking us to thank and support the website's sponsors, that THIS would be an appropriate reply? Come on, man. We get that you are liberal--and we know that we are in a free country with free speech, but really? This is what is humorous to about three or four of you on the board. The rest of us, especially after the 4th of July just passed, probably don't think a photoshop of a soldier that committed crimes having a UNT shirt on is respectful of the soldiers or the university. Its just not funny.

I think that what you would find, sadly, is that the big bowl games would fight to keep their tie-ins with the big BCS schools because of TV and media coverage. The reality is that most of the media really make the Boise State victory over OU out as a "miracle" and they always say the ratings are lower for those games vs. a big name bowl game (i.e., UT vs Ohio State). I don't personally know if the ratings are better or worse with a "Cinderella", but we are always told by the media elite that the population wants these big games between the name schools. I don't think the Orange Bowl, Cotton Bowl, Rose Bowl, etc..will ever give up having the big schools in their game. If legislation passed to correct this--ie force the smaller conferences to have access, I bet the bowl organizers would counter-sue in a heartbeat. And, to be honest, I can't blame them--the big schools have used their success to make new fans and alumni, increase interest, and drive the ratings game. Its probably the single biggest disappointment for UNT--if we had cared about athletics at all before the turn of the century, we could have easily been included in this mix. We literally have no one to blame but ourselves--and SMU, of course!!

Think Baylor is hurting? Not only did they receive more payout in BCS money than TCU or Boise did last year, 0-12 Washington received more than either of those two. Again, where is it better to be--bottom of BCS or top of non-BCS? Our hearts say the non-BCS becasue we like the little guy. Our heads know the answer, though. $$$$ talk--it makes it so much easier for a Baylor, when they do get a good coach, to succeed because they know that the resources they get is far better than any of the non-BCS. That is why Briles left UH.

Louisville, came out ok, I think. I mean, they get BCS money for football, they have gone to a BCS bowl game, and they get in one of the most premier hoops leagues for both men and women that produces great revenues. Its somewhat possible that they are just a bit better now than when they were in CUSA. (SARCASM)