GL2Greatness

of course a money game can be used to pay off the debt to the state north texas subsidizes the athletics department to the tine of 7 million in addition to the money from the athletics fee so every dollar of that direct subsidy that gets replaced with income can go right to the debt

blaming this on Rick Perry is just ignorance and stupidity 1. when lee the idiot was first appointed a majority of the BOR members were NOT appointed by Rick Perry so those that Rick Perry appointed did not have a majority 2. Rick Perry does not care about north Texas much less seek to screw it 3. a large number of the BOR members are alumni of north Texas so how sad would it be if they did actually do the bidding of Rick Perry instead of what is best for north Texas 4. north Texas has been poorly run for decades and the financial issues went back decades so trying to blame it on Rick Perry is the bleetings of a moron 5. the people that wanted lee the idiot and got lee the idiot is the public officials of dallas and dallas county which is royce the fool west and wiley the soon to be felon price and when royce the fool west was the head of the senate higher ed comission that is when lee the idiot was hired and it was so that royce and the other morons from the dallas area could exploit north Texas for the benefit of dallas and dallas county and in exchange they would keep out of the business dealing with all other state universities and be yes men for those universities plans 6. one has to look no further away than dallas and dallas county to see why north Texas is screwed and why lee the idiot has a job and Rick Perry had nothing to do with that and believing he did is just fools being foolish and blaming a scape goat instead of facing the facts of north Texas being poorly run by people that include alumni and being exploited for the benefit of dallas and dallas county

actually unT has that average for DOCTORATES which are not all PhDs and do not all count towards NRUF funding in Fiscal Year 2013 unT graduated 180 PhDs that would count towards NRUF funding and this year should be more, but then at Dr. Smastrek said there will be a dropp off in 2015 at least because 2014 was an abbynormal year for PhD/Doctorate production

SMU has the Annette Caldwell Simmons School of Education & Human Development

because north Texas dallas is separate university from the one in Denton and the whole point was to have the unneeded law school eventually attached to the unneeded university in south dallas because the whole purpose of lee and the other idiots is to use the financial backing/bonding ability of the Denton campus to secure funding for unneeded dallas economic development projects under the guise of "educational opportunity" north Texas dallas was not needed when it was built and it is not needed now and the enrollment numbers and the repeated failures to meet often reduced "goals" proves that out......what was needed down there was a community college campus which is why a large portion of the space at north Texas dallas is used by community college students under an agreement with DCCCD but corrupt and wasteful "my area" dallas politicians found a willing participant in the north Texas system and since that time they have been building more than is needed and wasting money with impunity and it comes at the expense and ability of the Denton campus to build and bond out their own projects all system bonds are backed by ALL system institutions they are not independent of one another so when a "calculated risk" is taken to build a building on south dallas that is larger than state formula funding would pay for and "belt tightening" occurs to pay for it......who do you think tightens their belt when enrollment projections in both Denton and especially south dallas are not met who do you think feels the squeeze of that.....Denton that has needs and projects that are NEEDED when the state does not cover the 25 million to renovate the UCD for the law school so the "system" does......who feels the squeeze of that.....Denton when the "system" buys a residential building (against the recommendations of the THECB) and that residential building fails to attract enough student residents and then still fails to meet rental projections even when it is opened up to non-students......who covers that lack of projected income.....Denton this is why even when the business building was needed the Denton campus had to raise a large amount of private money to build it.....because available bonding ability was all used up by dallas economic development projects this is why when the student union was built some clown from the administration sold students (including those that will never use the new union) to pay a much larger union fee so that "greedy bankers" would not make money off of bonds......but down in south dallas they were bonding out that new building that was larger than formula funding called for and using "belt tightening" and "a calculated risk" to go ahead and build it......so it can be rented out to DCCCD mostly this is why dorm and meal fees are going up so dramatially.....because the system is in a bind with total bonds let Vs total system income because of failed enrollment projections, "system" projects in dallas proper and now the financial improprieties......this is why the Denton campus had the "rent" jacked up by the "system" after the "system" bought the UCD building against the recommendations of the THECB that is why Dr. B was fired.....because the "system" bought the UCD when there was no need to and the THECB said it was not a smart move.......the "system" is largely funded by the DENTON STUDENTS and then the "system" started spending a bunch of money on the UCD and elsewhere and Denton was handed increased "rent" for a building they were basically already paying for through the "system" purchase The State of Texas does not fund "system" projects they fund SOME system administration and personnel cost.....all the rest of these "system" projects come on the backs of students in the system......and for the north Texas system that mostly means DENTON because TCOM is small and dallas is even smaller and failing massively to meet many times reduced enrollment projectons.....then there is the law school......again the VAST majority of the expenses of that are NOT state funded because of how the state funds "professional schools" like law ect Denton is a source of bind backing for dallas economic development projects under the guies of "higher education needs"......get used to it it is only going to get worse

1. the athletics fee can only be increased a single time for 10% of the amount of the orignal fee of $10 dollars without a student vote http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth149675/m1/2/ the legislation is very clear in section G that the fee cannot be increased over the amount ofr 10% one time without a student vote 2. if a student vote is held that will put th university budget to further scrunity and people will see that the university still subsidizes athletics to the tune of $7 million per year IN ADDITION TO the student fee on page 5 of the budget here http://www.unt.edu/ereports/pdffiles/FY14%20Budget%20Summary.pdf DES FUND SUPPL- ATHLETICS 6,920,647 6,920,647 6,920,647 then when you get to page 91 INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS FEE 60228 7,900,000 7,900,000 and when you scrool down to page 93 you see the income side of the equation is $20,215,719 including the $7.9 athletics fee and then over from there espenses are $27,136.366 which happens to be $20,215,719 + $6,920,647 so there is no interest in letting students know that the $10 dollar fee they are paying for "athletics" that was passed with a reduction of $3 dollars from the previous student services fee is really only half of the total university support provided for athletics and that in addition to $14,820,647 in total student subsidies the university now wants more money from students from athletics this is why the fee is not raised and this is why a vote to raise the fee past 10% (1 dollar) will not happen 3. RV made very clear in his past podcast that baseball pretty much required that the stajium either be 100% funded by donors or that it has enough guaranteed donations over the long term of finaicing and paying for the stajium for it to e paid for and there was no room for error or people not coming through on donations because of the budget sutiation and until the unversity is 100% sure the facility is 100% paid for or that donors that are guaranteed are in line the facility will not move forward 4. it was already well publicized that north Texas was concerend about their financial bond ratings even before the financial improprieties were announced here is an article from early 2013 that discusses the issue and this was well before the financial issues were announced Some regents expressed concern the bond rating could drop because of an increased amount of debt, but Allen Clemson, vice chancellor for administration and interim vice president for finance, said a lowered rating was not as important as ensuring these projects are completed as soon as possible. To move forward with the projects, Clemson reported the university would review project cash flows, develop funding and financial plans for each project, and schedule a finance committee meeting to continue the funding discussion. Additionally, they will consult a financial adviser to review funding and financing options and alternatives. so even before the financial issues and the bond outlook change to negative there were concerns that additional debt for housing and other projects would lower the bond rating (not just the outlook for the rating).......this is why the dorm and meal cost were raised so dramatically to have a larger pool of income to hopefully support those bonds without the ratings downgrade.....but that was before the financial issues were announced/discovered 5. there are multiple issues with the finances as well that are not being really fully discussed in a clear way in addition to having to pay the money back there is the fact that for a long time north Texas has had legitimate employees on the payroll getting paid with state funds that should not have been getting funded through state funds......that money will no longer be coming in from state funds, but those people are still employed by the university and the money to pay them will have to come from somewhere so that means that other areas will have to take a hit or additional revenues will have to be found.....or employees let go.....in addition to finding the money to pay the state back also as Dr. S has stated in the past 100% of anticipated income was budgeted to be spent and that is not financially sound, but what he has also stated that was much less covered was that for a long time north Texas was forcasting budgest with very agressive growth and that growth has not materialized as hoped for this goes back to at least the time when VLR had rasied tuition specifically for new faculty, but when the next fall enrollment dropped slightly new faculty hires were put off even though money for that had already been collected here is where it as raised http://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/headlines/20110321-unt-regents-approve-second-increase-in-tuition-fees-.ece here is where it was put off https://ntdaily.com/unt-to-hire-new-faculty-by-next-fall/ 2010 enrollment was 36,067 2011 was 35,694 so not a huge decrease, but when you budget for growth and at 100% you have no margin for error and this is where you end up.......especially when you have a high turnover of higher administration and "place holders" like VLR "running things" enrollment for 2014 is 36,216, but over a 5 year period 2010-2014 from 36,067 to 36,216 is not major growth (149 students) https://news.unt.edu/news-releases/unt-fall-enrollment-remains-strong-36216 Texas Tech on the other hand is from 31,587 to 35,134 http://today.ttu.edu/2014/09/texas-tech-enrollment-figures-shatter-previous-numbers/ UH from 38,752 to 40,959 http://www.uh.edu/news-events/stories/09122014Enrollment.php so there are issues beyond just the money to be paid back and those will have to be rectified at the cost of something somewhere

there is a major lack of acceptance of reality on this forum 1. the familair comment is "I could have gone AnYwHeRe, but I CHOSE north Texas" so you are admitting that you made a choice to come to a university that has discounted athletics for their entire existence and that has appealed to students that did not care for athletics and then you wonder why those former students still do not care about athletics.....clueless much? 2. Rick Perry and the leadership of the state of Texas really have nothing to do with how north Texas is governed......what ou still can't grasp and fail to realize is that back in 1998 or so north Texas and the fledgling north Texas system was basically handed off to the corrupt "leadership" of dallas and dallas county to bribe them to keep out of the politics and activities and wishes of all the remaining universities and university systems in Texas the THECB does not appoint BOR members that is done directly by the governor the THECB is a powerless organization in Texas there are several former north Texas students on the BOR as well you can read their BIOs here http://untsystem.edu/regents/profiles.htm but again these are just do nothing and rubber stampers that listen to what lee the idiot proposes and then they stamp it without further consideration or evaluation and 100% of that revolves around wasting state education dollars in dallas proper and dallas county.......look back when the "system" started taking over......look back when royce west and wiley price started taking an interest in the north Texas system (when royce was the chairman of the senate higher ed committee) take a look when the dallas juco was first proposed......and the joke of a law school.........take a look at the fact that royce really wanted an A&M or UT System school or even a TTU Sytem school in south dallas http://www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/senate/members/dist23/pr97/p050897a.htm when royce found out that A&M was only going to do a "system center" for the long term, UT said "no thanks" and Texas Tech said "no thanks" royce became very critical of all things A&M for a number of months.......then it was alhurley the moron and north Texas to the rescue......."conquering dallas!!!".......and everyone else in higher ed in Texas said....."take it and break it who cares just leave UT and A&M and Tech and UH and everyone else alone" and PS take a look at when the financial crisis and the lack of proper accounting and bookkeeking started happening.......not long after royce, lee and wiley got their hands on things and got THEIR morons in place and after the rest of the state stopped caring.......Rick Perry and the rest are not the issue the issue is right in your own back yard and it always has been and always will be 3. the "cheap" thing is a failure and really it is not even true here are the numbers Enrollment Increase 2000-2013 Total % Texas State University 13123 58.525 The University of Texas at Arlington 12905 63.185 The University of Texas at Dallas 10248 93.632 The University of Texas at San Antonio 9793 52.007 University of North Texas 9114 33.688 Texas Tech University 8598 35.53 The University of Texas at El Paso 7702 50.591 University of Houston 7417 23.089 Enrollment Increase 2008-2013 Total % The University of Texas at Arlington 8245 32.87 Texas State University 6441 22.13 The University of Texas at Dallas 6250 41.826 Texas Tech University 4375 15.393 University of Houston 3436 9.517 The University of Texas at El Paso 2468 12.064 University of North Texas 1470 4.2366 The University of Texas at San Antonio 210 0.7391 Tuition And Fees Increase 2000-2013 Dollars The University of Texas at Dallas 7627 University of Houston 6324 Texas Tech University 5974 The University of Texas at Arlington 5690 University of North Texas 5674 The University of Texas at San Antonio 5536 Texas State University 5341 The University of Texas at El Paso 4069 Tuition And Fees Increase 2008-2013 Dollars The University of Texas at Dallas 3038 University of North Texas 2398 Texas State University 2252 Texas Tech University 2159 The University of Texas at San Antonio 2156 The University of Texas at Arlington 2112 University of Houston 1605 The University of Texas at El Paso 1434 Average Tuition And Fees 2000 2008 2013 The University of Texas at Dallas $3,965 $8,554 $11,592 University of Houston $2,987 $7,706 $9,311 Texas Tech University $3,268 $7,083 $9,242 The University of Texas at Arlington $3,462 $7,040 $9,152 University of North Texas $3,404 $6,680 $9,078 The University of Texas at San Antonio $3,468 $6,848 $9,004 Texas State University $3,429 $6,518 $8,770 The University of Texas at El Paso $2,975 $5,610 $7,044 so the university with the largest gains in % of enrollment from 2000-2013 and from 2008-2013 also has the highest tuition by a long shot and the highest increase in tuition......they also have the most diffucult entrance requirements so there goes the common north Texas argument that "the others just let anyone in" (which is false anyway that same school also had the third highest increase in total students from 2000-1013 and from 2008-2013 UH has the highest total enrollment out of the emerging research universities and the second highest tuition and now the 3rd highest admissions requirements of those 8 universities behind UTD and TTU UTA has a slightly higher tuition and from 2000-2013 they had a slightly higher increase.....from 2008-2013 north Texas actually had the higher increase in tuition and fees.......but UTA had the higher enrollment increases long term and admissions requirements are pretty much a wash between the two and UTA actually enrolls a much higher % of students in the top 25% of HS class and the SAT and ACT scores are very similar (as per the 2014 NRUF report) and as per that report UTA and UTD were the only two universities with "freshman class of high achievement" so again any accusations of "letting anyone in for enrollment" would be false when you look at the universities that have been able to gain enrollment and that have tuition that is higher or slightly higher what really should stand out is those are the universities that have had consistent high quality leadership......they have not been bogged down by "system building" especially at the expense of the flagship campus, they have developed NEEDED and focused programs even if they were away from the flagship campus and that had broad state support they are consistently in national rankings for various popular programs, they have larger endowments and they excel at fundraising or they have finally started to take it serious and they have actually increased admissions standards or they had existing high admissions instead of keeping admissions lower for the purposes of income and enrollment......and two out of the three have already obtained NRUF funding and the third one will be the next university to do so probably in 2 years time they do not just give lip service to things or start stupid campaigns that end with a fizzle and they take actual mesurable achievements seriously instead of silly branding campaigns and hype that is not really true when more closely examined just an overall imability to accept the choices that some have made in a university, inability to evaluate and identify the issues (it is not SMU) at that university and the causes or to accept the position that university is in so as to have a realistic plan and expecations for the future......like oh I don't know say turning in the strategic plan for research to the THECB that was due several months back and actually using realistic numbers in it instead of pie in the sky numbers that are never met

north Texas took over the hotel in May of 2008 as verified by a post on this forum from the Fall of 2007 until today there are only 2,000 additional students not 10,000 and I doubt there is even a single new conference at north Texas that was not in place in 2008 and students generally do not stay at hotels anyway even if their parents might for a night or two one or two times, but there is no lack of hotels in Denton or available rooms for them and they do not need a convention facility also school districts are funded by property taxes so an increase in sales taxes means nothing to the school district especially relative to giving up property tax income and there will be little of any additional development that would generate new property taxes because the land surrounding the hotel is university owned, already developed or it will be a part of the TIF if it is developed so there will be little of any additional property taxes generated by the development of this hotel

here is my surprise face

he got an Ed.D not a PhD so there was no dissertation requirement which is commonly the case with professional doctorates Vs. PhDs

look at his past history the answer is pretty clear he is mentally weak

isn't it Mrs. Pedigo? (although some have indicated they wish it was Ms. Schilleci) and as for eligibility http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/behind+the+blue+disk/division+i+football+recruiting What are redshirting and grayshirting? Redshirting and grayshirting are delays in a student-athlete’s participation with a team. Typically, a student-athlete is eligible to compete in a certain sport for four years. However, a student-athlete may wait to compete for up to two years, extending his or her eligibility to five or six years. During a redshirt year, a student-athlete is signed to a team, enrolls at the start of a school’s academic year and practices, but does not compete. In a grayshirt situation, a student-athlete attends college classes but is not an official member of a team and does not practice or compete. Why would a student-athlete choose to redshirt or grayshirt? There are many reasons student-athletes choose to redshirt. They may want to gain a year of practice with the team or add size and strength before competing. They may redshirt if playing opportunities at their position are limited. If a student-athlete loses the majority of a season to injury, he or she may apply for a hardship waiver, known as a medical redshirt. Typically, student-athletes choose to grayshirt if they are injured just before college and need a full year to recuperate. so there are no exceptions for players playing any portion of the season and still taking a redshirt unless they have a documented injury (like say an undersized scrambling type QB that gets a head injury) and even then they have to apply for the hardship waiver and it is not guaranteed barring injury and a successful appeal for a hardship waiver participation even in a single play results in the use of a year of eligibility and as for brock and comparing him to other highly touted freshman recruits that are now starting for their teams 1. those players showed up at their respective universities PARTICIPATED IN PRACTICES AND SPRING DRILLS instead of flying home to hold on to mommies apron strings and unrequited love interest 2. they refrained from racking up any police charges that precluded them participating in more team activities and practices and resulted in them being a distraction to the team 3. when told they were going to have to step up and compete for the job they stepped up and competed for the job and or waited until injury afforded them the opportunity to play VS transfering 4. if they were to transfer they would have most likely transferred to a place they intended to try and compete and finish their eligibility instead of transferring to a place where they thought playing time would be handed to them based on year and a half old press clippings followed up with little if any practice time much less playing time and off the field legal issues 5. if they transferred yet again they would make sure to get the playbook down in a year and to be in top condition going into spring and fall workouts so they could present their best case for playing time so there is a difference between players that are fresh out of school, competing immediately, and staying out of trouble VS someone that is two years+ removed from those press clippings and that has been sitting on the sidelines or partying back at home and getting in trouble while looking for the next place to transfer to instead of competing

um....realism gets you placed on "restriction" on this forum where you can only post one time per day and other limits this forum is where bi-polar comes to have an athletics program to cheer for and associate with other sunshine pumpers/cliff jumpers haha this young lady is probably 20 years old I doubt she has a 2yo much less a son old enough to play for north Texas

ref mics or windmills you can have one, but you can't have both

http://firstrowus1.eu/watch/204744/1/watch-idaho-vs-north-texas.html now working it will have a screen saying you need a download ignore that and in a few seconds you will see a very small faint countdown clock in the upper left of the area saying you need a download and watch it count down and then you will see a faint word "close" appear on the lower left and click on that and the game will show up

he is channeling DD again with the offensive line "green team" and the subbing of the entire line as a unit GREEN TEAM GREEN TEAM!! #Hit4Plus2MoralVictories @Ramon Flanigan #LearnNames

it matters because he coaches at north Texas which means that dozens and dozens of programs can afford to hire him away if they want him and when those programs have both more money to pay and better facilities to offer and they do not have promises they did not keep it makes it all the easier and the coaching world is extremely small and coaches talk and when north Texas goes to get a new coach every candidate out there will pretty much know there is a very good chance any promise of improved facilities is really not worth much so either take the job because it is more money and look to move up and on in a few years or don't take the job and wait for a place that has the facilities, cash, or that will keep their promise to you when they hire you easier to lose a coach harder to find a replacement.....other than that ir means nothing

Cincinnati has been to two BCS games UConn 1 so that is tied with the current MWC for three total appearances with current/future teams with the MWC having a record of 2-1 and the AAC 0-3 but that still puts the AAC 0-3 well ahead of the MAC 0-1, Sunbelt 0-0 and CUSA 0-0 for BCS appearances and unless Rutgers or Louisville wins the conference this season (something that could well happen) the AAC will have yet another BCS appearance as well #Hit4Plus2MoralVictories @RamonFlanigan #LearnNames

with the exception that Vince actually played in the NFL......he was offensive rookie of the year in 2006.....he had the best record of any of the QB starters in the 2006 class (actual on field performance not high school and college press clippings performance) in 2009 he was the NFL comeback player of the year and he finished the Titans with a 30-17 record as a starter he may not have been the greatest NFL QB out there, but at least he was able to actually get on the field, play and win way more games than he lost as a starter instead of just moving around from place to place showing everyone his high school and college press clippings and wondering why he was not on the field #Hit4Plus2MoralVictories @RamonFlanigan #LearnNames

#Hit4Plus2MoralVictories

I think the starters go from right to left from Chico so DT, AM, DW and then the others guard the gatorade jug #Hit4Plus2MoralVictories

I always love the revisionist history on this forum and the over inflation of worth DMac did not "choose brock" over Scotty Young Scotty Young choose Louisiana Tech over north Texas Scotty Young was transferring to LaTech on June 9th of 2012 and the brockster was still a Fighting Artichoke at that time and did not look to north Texas until September of 2012 it is hard to "choose" one player over another when one player is already enrolled at another university 3 months before the other "choice" decided to come to north Texas #Hit4Plus2MoralVictories

and only at north Texas does the inability to land a starting job at 2 other places mean you should be handed the starting job based on high school press clippings from 3 years ago

how is this even remotely possible.....lets ignore the fact that schedules are made years in advance and when a series ends it is not possible for a school to say "hey north Texas is finally about to stop sucking so lets give them a chance to beat us even though we just played then a few times and beat them" and besides since when did it become the job or the responsibility to give other programs a chance to beat you when you think they are improving.....how about we just give north Texas a 100 year participation trophy and we can be happy with that and talk trash to all the programs that are moving on past.....oh wait those threads are already here on GMG and lets look at the numbers......SMU has played north Texas 33 times and they are 28-4-1 and that alone is about an average of playing north Texas every 3 years so tat is a lot of sucking on the part of north Texas and a lot of really good timing on the part of SMU to figure out just what years the real suck was going to be in effect (or maybe they just threw a dart at a board it would be about the same when the board is all suck except for the bulls eye) TCU is 16-2 and Baylor is 12-1....so again they were really good at figuring out when the suck years were that is for sure and if you add all that up it is 56-7-1 with 64 games total for a team that has played 100 years of football (not subtracting the war years when football was not played)......so yea that is just amazing that three teams were all able to continuously pick all the suck years and avoid the really good years out of 56 of 64 games in a 100 year period not to mention that for a long period of time those three teams all were playing against each other, they were in a conference with all Texas teams or all Texas teams + Arkansas and they were not needing even more Texas exposure or games because they had pretty much every area of the state covered as far as recruiting and exposure went and especially the DFW metro area with both TCU and SMU in the conference and the area.....then there was the 15 year drop down to D1-AA for north Texas as well when they became even less attractive as an opponent VS the multitude of other available games in the state and region and yet they still did manage to get 64 games scheduled with north Texas and they managed to win 56 of them which is an amazing ability to figure out when a team is going to suck VS avoiding them when they have all those really great years.....unless the reality is the really great years were few and far between and some of them are represented in those 7 wins that north Texas managed to mix in pathetic that a program would even remotely make the argument that teams avoid them when they are good much less they would continue to post it on a fan forum for their team and chant that mantra over and over and over......if 64 chances in 100 years was not enough to get more than 7 wins and a tie how many more damn chances are needed?

the score the last time north Texas played Baylor was 37-14 in favor of Baylor on 9-25-2004.......not a huge ass whipping, but a nice win for a terrible team at the time that had only 3 wins that season north Texas is 1-12 against Baylor overall, but Baylor only plays north Texas when north Texas is really bad!!!