GrandGreen

My predictions for break out years for players with little or no playing time last year. Mongomery at rb, Jenkins in ol, Fentress at wr, Horton at de, Ross at dt, Edwards and Cooks at db. Breaking into the starting lineup next year: Jenkins at ot, Fentress & Roberson at wr, Horton & Daveport at de's, Miller at dt, Pinson and Nwigwe at lb, Edwards, Cooks and Juco Hill at DB. Biggest contribution by a newcomer, Horton.

Couple of comments, even if the freshmen safeties are redshirted, that still leaves Agobottah, Hill, Garden, and Edwards at the safety positions. Also. Dawson played lb for NT prior to last year; he was not switched when NT went to a 3-4. Dawson is a good player, and whether he plays safety or outside linebacker; he should be a contributor this year. Back to the redshirt question, IMO TD loaded up on defensive backs because he saw that as a big need positions particularly after losing underclassmen Roman, Chatman, Green, Nelson, and Ealey. I really don't think it is in his plans to redshirt all 6 recruited high school backs. I doubt more than 2 redshirt. I hope and think TD will coach to win the conference this year, nor being content to just build for the future.

Germaine started at linebacker under DD, I wonder why he was switched to safety. It seems to me that he could help a lot more at linebacker than safety. While there is not a whole lot of returning experience at safety, the position is loaded with new potentially very good players. I don't see the logic in giving Dawson a lot of time at safety in his senior year at the expense of Edwards, Hill, Shorter, Phillips, Williams and others.

Who cares? Minor sports are only marginally supported at the majority of NCAA schools. Do you think having no points in the Directors' Cup is more damaging then a hapless 2-10 football team. Judging by the number of posts, I am among the few who takes any interest in so called non-revenue sports. Are a few points on the national scene all that important? However, if you are really concerned about NT's overall sports program then look at the Belt statistics. NT almost annually finishes third behind WKU and MTSU. This was an off year for NT, not winning a Belt championship in anything which is very disappointing. However, NT still managed a third place finish in the Burba standings. There was great improvement in tennis and swimming and to a lesser degree Softball. The volleyball team had a disappointing year and Golf continues to be mediocre at best. The track teams continue to IMO under perform although they finish near the top. The answer to upgrading rankings in "all sports" competition is simple. You have to take the lesser sports as seriously as basketball and football and demand results and provide at least adequate resources to compete. I think NT has actually upgraded their most needy sports, but still has too many coaches who tend to coast and threat their jobs as part time. Yes, some are paid like they are part time jobs and that should change. NT has an enormous advantage in the sports that have very limited ships and allow partial ships such as swimming, track, soccer, and softball. There are a great number of athletes in this area who it is advantageous to go to a state supported local university to reduce costs when only receiving partial scholarships.

Although a win would be great, NT does not schedule these games because they expect to win, they schedule them to balance the budget At this time NT cannot afford to not play one or probably two guarantee games; an 1=AA game would only replace a home and home schedule with a school such as Rice, Tulsa, etc. Schools play 1=AA teams because they are relatively cheap home games with no return game necessary. "Big time" programs can play 1-AA because most of their oc games are at home and tickets sales are not a problem. NT with a max of 2 oc home games greatly downgrades its home schedule and gains nothing IMO from a win.

Please consider how relatively little NT makes on it's home games, that maybe a glue why NT does not schedule more home games. Given NT has to have "guarantee" games to come close to balancing the budget and have a home schedule that can sell a few tickets, it is easy to understand why NT doesn't rush to schedule 1-AA teams. Would you want to replace Navy last year or Tulsa this year with a 1-AA game?

Long winded commentary on US News and World Report University Ratings Most academic officials condemn the US News and World Report rankings of universities as being bias and overall not very useful. But despite almost universal condemnation, almost all schools still submit data because they are fearful of low rankings handed out to non-cooperating schools. Many question the methodology as well as the usefulness of the data. There have also been many questions relating to the accuracy of un-audited data submitted by the universities. Do you know that the biggest factor in the ratings is completely subjective? 25% of the evaluation is the peer assessment. Were educators at competing universities evaluate other universities with generally little or no first-hand knowledge of the particular institution. Previous poorly rated schools are obviously at a big disadvantage in this criterion. The rating factors are: Peer Assessment 25%, Retention 20%, Faculty Resources 20%, Student Selectivity 15%, Alumni Giving 5%, Graduation Rate 5%, and Financial Resources 10%. All the above criteria are ancillary to the real objective of University performance, how well does the school educate its students. It is impossible to quantify how well a college actually educates. It seems to me that high retention of students and high graduation rates are factors that could be just as easily be argued as signs that a college is not challenging. Student selectivity has nothing to do with the merits of the education received. Faculty resources, which include salaries, class size and degrees; Alumni giving; and financial resources are all tied to how much is spend on the education of students. As those familiar with public high schools can attest, that spending more seldom equals to corresponding effectiveness. It will be very difficult for NT to rise in this type of evaluation system. The historical perception from those not affiliated with the school is that NT is an adequate institution but hardly an outstanding one. This peer review accounts for one fourth of the rating. The retention factor is also difficult for big city public universities that have large numbers of students already in careers that interfere with continuing education because of changing job responsibilities and relocations. It is going to take decades for NT to get its financial resources up to par with a current very small endowment and a state that continues to reduce funding. The good news is despite its historically understated quality, rising tuition, poor financial situation, and all the gloomy other things that have been expressed: NT continues to grow despite higher entrance requirements. The word is getting out.

TCU got a whole 8 first downs in the Fort Worth game, but yet the froggy fans claimed pure dominance over the hapless Green. A game NT should have won but DD with new QB Smith in the game would not pass after he badly missed a couple of open receivers. This is the game were the famous "pass the ball" chant was initiated.

Being this poll identifies the voters, I am not sure a bunch of obviously NT voters is going to make much of an impression. It denotes fan interest but also can make other conference responders look kind of desperate. A move to CUSA would be good for NT because of geography and better known rivals, but I don't think it is a big leap in competition. A bunch of responses to this poll only feeds CUSA egos who think or hope that their conference is far superior.

Interesting that Dufus doesn't want to play ULM because it is beneath LaTech but wants to schedule an 1-AA every year. I would have loved to hear the conversation between Dooley and his boss over this little hiccup.

I am probably all those things, but have no idea who or what Sam Smith refers to.

OB Vizza, Meager, Tune RB Moseley, Montgomery, Dunbar OR Roberson, Dibrell, Barrett IR Fentress, Johnson, Walker IR Fitzgerald, Brigman, Taylor OR Strickler, Lewis, King OT Menard, Tomlison, Kaiser OG Santiago, Hollovay, Glass C Drake, Johnson, Leppo OG Bailey, Rose, Freely OT Jenkins, Gill, Frankin Obviously, Dodge could be the number two or even the number one QB if he does not redshirt. I think the number 1 and 2 receivers based on receptions are going to be Fitzgerald and Fentress. Strickler is the best blocking receiver and I believe he will start. Picking between Roberson, Johnson and Dibrell for the last starting receiver position is going to be close. Dibrell has a special connection with Vizza and started at the end of last year. Roberson is probable the most physically gifted of all the receivers. Johnson before being injured last year was labeled as one of the best wrs on the team but is probably more suited to the slot and I don't think he can beat out Fentress. Offensive line with 5 returning starters plus a lot of incoming talent is going to be very competitive. Only Drake at center and if the hype is anywhere close, Jenkins are sure starters. Look for real competition between returning starters Bailey, Santiago, and Menard with Rose who started both his freshman and sophomore year at center, Gill who is much bigger than most seem to realize, redshirt Tomlison and Juco Hollovay. Running back will be a rotation between Moseley and Montgomery with who starts not being important.

When I first starting perusing fan boards, I was struck with how fans of two schools seemed to be completely delusional about their athletic status and potential. One, was Central Florida which IMO due primary to a great locations, has made great strides. The other was La Tech whose athletic fortunes have basically been down hill from that point. Having been to Ruston for NT last game there and researching LaTech when both NT and LT were up for CUSA, I have no idea how they think they are significantly ahead of ULM or any other BC university. I was amazed that even SMU could have supported their position for CUSA above NT. Latech fans slamming other schools no matter how irrational, is to be expected; but when representatives of the school do so, then I think there are underlying problems with the institution. CUSA, WAC, MAC and MWC conference members putting down the SBC may make them feel better, but the truth is every conference is a group of "have-nots" in the college athletic game. To try to differentiate between non Power conferences, is much to do about nothing. If La Tech wants to stay in the WAC till they are invited to CUSA or the SEC and never play ULM, more power to them. It would also be fine with me, if NT and the rest of the Belt teams did not schedule them in anything.

Do you realize when she started recruiting? There is not going to be a lot of first tier recruits available when you have to start as late as Stephens. Getting a potentially big time transfer is great under the circumstances. The timing could not be better, NT is losing 4 guards next year and guard is really not a big need next season. As stated above, JJ has picked up some very good recruits this way, Dennis, Wooden and Davis. The fact that Hudson was rated the fifth best player in Texas a year ago, and will have three years remaining eligibility; makes this an excellent recruiting start for Stephens.

I think everyone is happy to have Mayberry has a Green commit. The only downside is that WR can hardy be considered a need position. Per TD on recruiting, 12 wr's is his target. He apparently has 14 on ship with 2 being seniors with the rest being freshmen and sophomores. The positive is that Mayberry must be a very good recruit to merit a ship at this position. Most expect TD is going to get great WR recruits so the "wow factor" is not the same as for other positions.

Franklin is not included on what I assume is the current roster on the Oil Bowl official site. /www.timesrecordnews.com/news/oilbowl/

Maybe, but he is currently not listed on the roster.

Thanks, for supporting my point. Yes, it does go for every team in every sport. "Well if we didn't make the plays we did we would have lost..." is exactly the same as "well if we make the plays we would have won". As far as the negativity, the focus of the comment was to question all that sunshine created by those near victories NT had last year. But CRAP, I am sure I could have been more positive.

I am definitely a homer, but trying to somehow elevate last season's performance because of a few close games is more than a stretch. First, the two victories could have been more easily defeats than any of the games that NT lost that could have been wins. NT had a nail biter in beating out essentially a 1-AA team, WKU. The 10 point victory over ULM was primarily due to two interceptions returned for td's. The only really close lost NT had was by four points to ASU. While not on the order of 69 and 59 loses to OU and Arkansas respectively, loses to MTSU by 20 and Troy by 38 were hardly stellar performances. Add to that the fact that NT was the only team to lose to both SMU (by 14) and FIU (by 19) should definitely quite any "so close to winning" talk.

Unlike most of you, I though last year would have been substantially better than it was. Based on a good Belt level defense and an improved offense, I predicted that NT would be among the leaders in the conference. What I failed to recognize was just how inexperienced and ill prepared the coaching staff was. Last years team was as bad as I have ever seen at NT. Yes the offense was improved, after DD's last two years, improvement was not difficult. However, most of the offensive fireworks occurred in two oc games and NT did not exactly light up the Belt on either side of the ball. Again, I hope not as foolishly as last year, I think NT will be among the top tier in the Belt. I basically think that both the offense an defense will be substantially improved. The defense with the exception of the defensive line should be more talented and obviously the coaching will be much better. With another year in TD's system, the offense should be vastly improved. With five returning starters in the offensive line and upgrades in the receiving corp, the offense should be in the top two the Belt. I think seven wins next year is very doable. The level of skill personnel talent that TD has assembled in just two years, although still young, should begin to overwhelm the Belt.

If I remember correctly, NT got commits from some of its highest rated recruits last year after seasons end. I think the slower start is due to less scholarships and the fact that NT need areas are the most difficult to recruit. NT biggest need is defensive lineman which is the most competitive area of recruiting. TD's offensive reputation is not a lot of help recruiting defensive linemen. TD's first two classes although overall were excellent for NT, defensive linemen were clearly the weakest area. I am not concerned about linebacker recruiting, it is a relatively easy position to recruit and I think NT will do well getting impact linebackers. I think NT already has potentially very good young players at QB, RB, OL, WR and DB, going after the sub-blue chip recruit in these positions is not a priority.

Actually they only paid for a portion of it. State funds keep getting reduced, but students are still a way off from paying for the full cost of their education. Yes, people have a choice about what they support to some extent. Obviously, if you are a taxpayer you are probably supporting many causes that you may not subscribe to. As for as paying for an education, I think most would think that is a very good investment. There is nothing mandatory about any charitable contribution, but thankfully many chose to give. If owing to you denotes having a contractual obligation to donate, than nothing is owed to your degree institution. Of course, the same could be said about your most important relationships with friends and family.

Underclassmen scholarship cornerbacks Adams Jr Bush Jr Neal So Cooks Fr Hill Fr Hamilton Fr Like any other positions, I am sure that NT will offer the right prospects; but this doesn't appear to be a need area. As far as Vito, I enjoy his blog although it is a little over dramatic. But what else is there to report in June?

Just do any kind of financial model and see if you can replace a so called "money game" with any one for one series, not going to happen. Any home game in an even series between schools usually means that the home team is going to get paid once for two games (home and away). Make your wildest assumptions, such as NT could sell 15000 seats at $30 that would give you $450,000 ticket revenue plus parking and concessions less game expenses for the home game and traveling expenses for the away game. Even assuming NT could net the total $450,000, highly unlikely, that would give NT an average of $225,000 a game compared to a money game of $500k to $1m. There is no way in the foreseeable future that NT won't have to rely on "money" games. The only exception would be if NT decides to completely drop out of bowl level football.