SilverEagle

Hell, I never went there, but I remember when it opened. It's now a Bank. Speaking of construction.... http://www.star-telegram.com/arlington_new...ry/1202472.html Some of the details. Special-events center Cost: $73 million, with the money coming from $35 million in university funds; $28 million in revenue bonds; and $10 million in private money the university plans to raise

Would everyone have to wear white shoes? Okay, now I have to google him and see if he is still alive.

SoCo? That would seem to be a rather "pricey" drink for the KA's of my generation (1975).

I always thought that MGC (based on the definition of clubs) was a misnomer. Most clubs meet or gather on a regular basis. Here's a free health tip for you Flyer. Don't hold your breath while you are waiting to hear something.

I'm going to have to strongly disagree with you on that statement. It is NOT the the job of colleges to teach basic issues of right and wrong to students THAT IS THE JOB OF THEIR PARENTS. College teaches you how to academically problem solve at a higher level than....well....High School. I remember several years ago hearing about a former USC (maybe it was UCLA) football player who sued his school because he couldn't read or write. He thought that he was going to have a pro career, and when that didn't happen, he couldn't make it in the real world.....so he sued his school. My wife and I were shocked at such a situation. Our shock was that an athlete that couldn't read or write was allowed to attend a college, and that the athlete and his family thought that it was USC, or UCLA's fault. The only fault was that the college in question committed fraud in bringing him in and calling him a "student athlete", and it wasn't detected for four or five years. If anyone needed to be sued in this situation, it's the primary school system where he attended and/or HIS PARENTS.

BINGO AGAIN! There is absolutely none of the assistants that are listed at the beginning of this thread that would take the kind of pay cut, and career risk, that taking the head ccoaching job here entails. Someone on their way up, or in the case of Carthel, someone who is trying to make a big splash toward the end of their career (kind of like Snelly at FAU) is the ideal candidate. If it had been me, I would have interviewed Carthel and the coach at Abilene Christian, and ask them to honestly assess our program, and come up with a viable plan to move the program forward. The one with the most realistic and positive plan would get the job.

BINGO! Anyone who takes the job of coaching at North Texas has to understand the culture of "football is little more than a club sport" attitude that has exsisted for most of the history of our school. Yes, we had success in the late 40's and Fouts was built in the early 50's, and that would seem to indicate that the administration cared about furthuring the program. But as we have pointed out many times, Fouts is more of a track stadium than a football facility. We didn't start a Mean Green Club until Hayden Fry came here...and he started it. I'm told by knowledgable alumni that up until that point, that sort of fund raising organization was discouraged by Dr. Matthews,...... and for that matter Odus Mitchell. I'm told that during our successful run in the 60's (66,67,68,69), this issue was brought up by alumni who wanted us to move up to the next level. They were told no. It took Hayden Fry and Jitter Nolan to change that, and I'd be willing to bet that they were met with a lot of resistance by all the "old nesters" at North Texas who were of the same mind-set as Dr. Matthews. I'm guessing that Hayden Fry got as much resistance to moving us up in stature from the inside as the outside. When Hayden Fry left, we hired Jerry Moore instead of hiring Bill Brasher. Bill Brasher would have provided the program with some stability. After Jerry Moore was hired away from us we hired Bob Tyler, who because of his NCAA violations at another school (and I suppose other reasons) turned out to be a huge disaster. We then hired Corky Nelson, whom we should have hired instead of Bob Tyler. Corky did every thing that he was asked to do... and probably much more. He won as many games as he could have with the very limited resources that he was given (the Matthews mind-set people were back in charge). Coach Parker was hired by a committee....and it showed. Matt Simon was a pretty good hire, but he didn't keep quiet about his lack of resources, so he was fired. I believe that Coach Dickey was hired because the then AD (Helwig) didn't want to go to any trouble interviewing people. I don't think that Coach Dickey had any idea about what he was getting himself into. The last coach that came here with his eyes wide open was Corkey Nelson. And that was because he had served as the DL coach under Rod Rust. We have never been in a position to have (administratively) all our ducks in a row here. And after the last two years, I don't know if we ever will. I believe that the only way we will ever be successful is to get the next Coach Fran, Coach Bailiff etc ON THEIR WAY UP. When each leaves (hired away from us), we hire the next guy that matches the previous coach's personality and energy. It isn't rocket science, but some people seem to think it is.

Well, if he's anything like a former Liberty Christian player (#37 on your program) then I say "sign him up".

Well at least they had a pretty good collection of Northwestern State (of Lousiana) gear.

RB is not a position that I worry about either. If nothing else, and depending how the QB competition turns out, you could put Chase Baine (6'X 201) in at RB. He ran a lot as a QB in HS, and anyone who is fast enough to play slot receiver is certainly fast enough to play RB.

The work done this off season and spring, both in the weight room and with the new staff, is what is going to make the biggest difference this next season.

That's interesting. I always thought of tutoring as when a knowledgeable person comes along to help someone AFTER that person has given it a try but just can't figure something out. Telling them that they should acquire a book, go to class, and take notes is not my idea of tutoring. Oh well.

That would be a refreshing thing to see.....

From the NT Blog. 11:20 a.m. - A few people have been asking about the new JC signees, including Scott, who asked about those that are already in school. North Texas has five transfers that are now enrolling in classes this semester. Jeremy Bean (OL), Jamaal Jackson (WR), Mike Outlaw (WR), Ira Smith (CB) and Tyler Stradford (WR) will all be suiting up for the Mean Green in the fall. Update: They seemed to have changed their minds. 12:15 p.m. - A couple questions that we need to answer. The Todd Dodge press conference will be streamed live at 1 p.m. on MeanGreenSports.com free of charge. You can get there by clicking on Mean Green Premium or Gameday link and then click on upcoming live events. Also, wide receiver Tyler Stradford who has transferred to North Texas from Oklahoma is currently not eligible to play for the Mean Green this season. There have been some situations in college football where student-athletes who were affected by Hurricane Katrina have been granted waivers from the transfer limitations, but as of now that is not the case for him.

I was a little concerned about a 6'1" X 225 DE, but I remembered that one of Hayden Fry's DE's was Bernard West. He was smaller (about 6' X 190) than Washington, but he was very fast. He made a lot of big plays while he was playing here. If I recall correctly, I believe his (Bernard West's) nickname was "Alli Babba".

Oh, and on the Food channel........... Diners, Drive-ins and Dives.

It all depends on what level they are "up and coming" from. I would guess that any "up and coming" D-II or 1-AA head coach would love the opportunity to be the head coach here. Baliff is going to get hired away from Rice one of these days. I just wish it had been us that he was getting hired away from. For future reference, our administration should profile Coach Baliff, and his early career, so that we know what sort of "up and comer" to hire next.

Welcome aboard Coach Nelson!

We've had a football program since 1913, and we still see ourselves as a groud floor opportunity? Now, THAT'S what I call positive thinking. .....and salesmanship.

Isn't that just about always the case with North Texas football?

Thanks for the Billy Mayes moment.

Burn Notice The Closer Fringe Life Supernatural Lie to me Bones Cable Premium Real Time True Blood

I am positive about GMG.(that's what the poll asks) I believe that I am positively realistic about my expectations about my alma mater and it's programs. However I find myself mostly negative about some of the very questionable decisions that have been made (down the corridor of years) by the people that were hired to run my school's athletic program. Starting about the time that Hayden Fry left. The last time that any North Texas administrator (or committee) got bold and/or genius (or even realistic) in their decision making was when Jitter Nolan found a way to bring Hayden Fry on board. I would include Corky Nelson in that "great decision" statement, but he was hired (after he came after the job for a second time) after the Bob Tyler debaucle. And so I would say the decision to hire him was "accidently good."

Ed Wallace has some interesting thoughts about our economic situation. The Conundrum Ed Wallace, Special to the Star-Telegram For the last eight years it has been almost a constant mantra that Americans have failed themselves by not putting enough aside into personal savings. That observation has gotten shriller within the past few years, warning that we actually had a negative savings rate – meaning we were going into debt just to keep our heads above water. This was considered a bad thing for our nation’s economy. Today, those same voices are saying that one of the major problems in this current economic downturn is the fact that people have ceased their rampant consumerism and are now saving money every chance they get. So much so that their non-spending is aggravating the economy’s downturn, already in trouble thanks to our banking crisis. And yes, this too is considered a bad thing for our economy. OK, which is it? Too much spending or too little? In the same way, we can’t win with the price of oil. Last year, when gasoline prices shot past $4 a gallon and the price of light sweet crude on the futures market went above $147 a barrel, that was a bad thing – a sure-fire way to throw any nation into a recession. But now that oil has collapsed, prices falling as low as $33 a barrel, well, that’s a bad thing too! It will keep money from being put into critical investments that ensure a constant (and hopefully increasing) crude supply in the future, when growth returns to the world market. Naturally, Detroit has been caught in the lose-lose paradigm. For decades our automakers were relentlessly bashed for not building vehicles of higher quality – and thus lost market share, primarily to the Japanese automakers, which was a bad thing. But then Detroit apparently saw the light and came up with far better product across their lineups, and guess what happened? People started keeping those vehicles longer and longer. That sank the nation’s overall volume of car sales, and that brought Detroit into another era of financial crisis. And that’s a bad thing, too. Oh, and the housing market. From 2000 to 2005, with prices in many markets in America constantly rising, the wise saw the housing market as a bubble and therefore a bad thing – but when that bubble broke and housing prices collapsed, things got sure-enough bad. It is our national conundrum: Apparently, no matter what we do, it’s not healthy for the long-term success of the American economy. Save too little, save too much; too many purchases or too few; car quality improves but sales go down; housing booms, housing busts – nothing works quite right. And then we wonder why no government bailout is working as advertised. Moreover, because no one can say what really is the smart thing to do, no one knows whether future stimulus packages will work as projected. There are two reasons for all these scenarios, making this period seem more like an economic roller coaster than it needs to. One is that as consumers, we live in the now and we want results now. The other reason is that our system of statistical analysis is so far skewed toward fantasy we never quite know where we are at any given time. Who’s Supposed to Announce This? Then too, comparing today’s problems with those of the past only confuses the issue and compounds our ignorance. An example: Recently many articles have stated that December’s car sales were close to the total sold in August of 1982, annualizing to just fewer than 10 million total sales. That would be great as a benchmark statistic, except that the motorized workforce in America is almost 50 percent larger now; therefore, those sales figures today don’t mean what they did in 1982. Total sales equal a substantially lower percentage because the size of the potential car market has gone up by almost 50 percent. The most telling pertinent statistic is that in 1983 there were approximately 160 million vehicles in America; therefore, an annualized rate of 10 million sales would mean that one out of 16 vehicles was being replaced that year. Today at the same annualized sales rate, we are replacing only one out of every 22 vehicles. Therein lies the real fact that has automakers from Detroit to Tokyo to Stuttgart worried. That statistic, however, probably doesn’t carry over to local markets. Most new car dealers now sell far more used cars than they once did, and that changes the replacement component. Many individuals are in fact replacing their older cars, but not with brand new ones. So the low national volume of new car sales is a problem for manufacturers, but not necessarily for our local dealers. Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics The excessive debt of the past few years is likewise misunderstood, because it doesn’t fall into the "one size fits all" category. Sure, some people charged or borrowed too much because their incomes failed to rise along with inflation; each year that went by saw them slipping further down the economic ladder. Another economic group had no problem going further into debt because their outstanding loans and repayment schedules still fell well within the proper limits of debt to income. Put another way, in many years in this decade Americans were taking out $800 billion a year in home equity loans. Those who were using such loans to pay debts they already owed were and are mostly their creditors’ problem children. Those who took out those loans for remodeling or to expand their properties were far more likely to repay them. Also, I’ve covered it in this column before, but the media really should quit comparing today’s unemployment with that of years gone by. It’s worse than misleading, because how we calculate those statistics is so different now: Saying that today’s unemployment numbers are far better than 1982’s is a serious misstatement of fact. The same is true for our National GDP, Inflation and Money Supply figures. And this all takes us to our bailouts and stimulus packages, whatever final form they might take. You’re Supposed to Learn from Mistakes Those on the left want the monies to save homeowners and others who have gotten in over their head financially. That’s an admirably altruistic thing to do – except that it continues to prop up the price of overvalued homes, which is exactly what those mortgages did that started this mess. But if excessive debt and overpriced assets got us into this mess, how can any sane adult think that adding more excessive debt to keep assets overvalued will get us out of it? Those on the right see this as an opportunity to permanently save their previous tax cuts and maybe add a few more along the way. Obviously, many who benefit would love to see that political wing win out. The problem is that this theory – that tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans somehow trickle down to the public at large in an expanded economy – has so often been disproven. It was wrong when Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon first put it into play in 1927; it was proven wrong in the early 80s and proven wrong again in this decade. If you want upper-end tax cuts, great, but quit saying that somehow they raise the economy for everyone. History shows that all it does is take us into a period of massive speculation, followed by collapses in our banking system. Doubt that? Remember 1929, 1987 and today. What to Do Now So, what’s the real answer? Probably common sense. Fortunately, that’s something we seem to have in relative abundance in Texas. Those who bought homes they could not afford are experiencing great tragedy, but keeping their fantasy alive is neither prudent financially nor even viable long term. That is the hardest line I’ve ever written in this column. But it’s true: For every family that loses a home, another will find housing more affordable because of the price fall-off. In time, even those who lose their homes will reenter the market, and they too will find housing more affordable the next time around. Save the banks, yes, but quit saving the speculators who bet wrong on virtually everything in this past decade. Who wouldn’t love to go to Vegas if the government covered all of our losses at the blackjack table, but we kept all of our winnings? That’s what many speculators have been enjoying, and it’s wrong. So: Immediately declare null and void all derivative contracts worldwide where the investor doesn’t have a vested interest in the property that the derivative was purchased for. After all, you can’t buy life insurance on someone you are not financially bound to, so why should someone be able to buy a derivative (insurance) on a mortgage or bond package they don’t own? That’s nothing more than a side bet on someone else’s action, and it leads some individuals to bet on disaster because it makes them rich while everyone else suffers. But our government is covering those side bets now – and it needs to end. For us, mostly, I’d say it’s time to find a way to bring more companies and individuals to Texas to start over again. That 150-year-old tradition ensures that in the future, we’ll continue to grow and prosper no matter what.