UNTstormchaser

There are a couple things you guys have to remember about that though. For one, like I said above, unfortunately there are a much higher percentage of idiotic, worthless pit owners than there are idiotic, worthless golden retriever owners. Just because some lowlife trusts his dog doesn't mean that the dog was actually trained well and then freaked out despite that. The fact of the matter is that most problems with pits stem from the idiocy of the owners. The other thing that needs to be considered here is that the media LOVES pit attack stories. They jump all over every single one of them, because nobody gives a damn when a black lab bites someone, but if a pit (or rottweiler/any other "aggressive" breed) bites someone, it's an instant headline. So you're going to wind up hearing a lot more about those damn pit bull monsters than you are about any other breed of dog attacking someone. I'm not denying that any animal can snap at any time, or that pits have an especially dangerous bite due to their size, strength, and locking jaw. But the generalization of an entire breed of dog is just plain wrong, especially when the problem lies with people, and when that generalization leads to the straight-up killing of a countless number of innocent, nonviolent pits. Here's a couple links for you guys. The first is about pits specifically and setting the record straight on some misinformation and stereotypes, and the second is a study on the most aggressive dog breeds. http://www.care2.com/greenliving/10-things-you-never-knew-about-pit-bulls.html http://www.dogguide.net/blog/2008/07/the-3-most-aggressive-dog-breeds-revealed-pit-bulls-rottweilers-youll-be-surprised/

I didn't say that animals and children don't mix, just that it needs to be a controlled environment. I'm a liberal hippie animal hugger (exaggeration), but if little Johnnie yanks on Fluffy's tail and gets clawed in the eye, who is at fault? Not the kid, he doesn't know better if he's a toddler. Not the animal, it's a defense reaction. It's the parents (or whoever is in charge) for not maintaining control over the environment in which the interaction occurred. Cats are obviously much safer than large dogs with children though.

I just reread this and realized how great it'd be to be a dog. Lucky bastards...(pun intended)

Firstly, animals and small children don't mix well outside of a very, very controlled environment, and anyone who fails to realize this is an ignoramus who shouldn't legally be allowed to reproduce to begin with. But, I digress... Pit bulls aren't the problem here, the same way guns aren't the problem when people get shot. People are the problem. You take an 80-100 pound dog with Schwarzenegger muscles and a locking jaw, and you put him in an environment with uneducated people who haven't the slightest clue how to own/train/take care of a dog, and there are going to be problems. Unfortunately, the uneducated people who haven't the slightest clue how to own/train/take care of dogs have an immense affinity for big, bad ass, defense dogs like pit bulls, so we get lots of problems. If you want to actually solve the problem, and not create a new one (which an outright ban of pit bulls causes), make it illegal to own an "aggressive" breed (or, better yet, ANY ANIMAL) without a background check of sorts that ensures the owners can actually handle the animal they're taking on. I'm not gonna sit here and tell you that pit bulls are the nicest, kindest animals on earth, because saying that about any breed or animal is pointless. It all depends on the individual animal and the situation it is in. But what I can tell you is that every pit I've ever met, including my roommate's which is a boxer-pit mix that I've grown very close with, has been incredibly friendly and sweet. I can also tell you the other side of the coin, because my cousin's german shepard-pit mix, who is super friendly with people, nearly killed a small dog that was annoying him. My roommate's dog Captain, the boxer-pit mix, is the most loving dog I've ever met in my life though. I'm comfortable enough with him to have fairly intense play-wrestling matches with him. The trick is that he's well-trained and knows his role. My roommate is his alpha, his fiance is the matriarch with whom he must be very delicate, and I'm a level of authority within the pack only slightly below the alpha. If Captain shows any sign of aggression ever or he is misbehaving in some other way, all it takes usually is a light smack on the nose and he gets it. It never takes more than a second, harder warning smack. Usually at that point, he'll try to lick me to death to apologize, and life moves on. Could he someday have a problem, switch into animal mode, and bite someone, be it me, my roommate, or a stranger? Yeah of course, any dog could. But the thought of Captain being illegal because he's aggressive is laughable at best. Anyone with the daily routine of snuggle, eat, poop, play rope, sleep, snuggle, eat, poop, play bone, snuggle, sleep, is not aggressive.

I've decided to break my prolonged state of silence on this site, because though this thread hasn't been touched in a month, I feel like what I have to say can legitimately contribute to the discussion here (and in the pit bull attack discussion). First things first, Sam Hurd is a moron and very much deserves a prison sentence. Whether or not its length is justifiable is a debate in the ethics of punishment that I'm just not interested in getting into, but the man is about as dumb as they come. And, for that matter, big time dealers who buy/distribute large amounts of illegal drugs of all kinds (none of them are doing just one, it's all or nothing in that business because profit is the only motive, and more drugs=more money) are scum who deserve what they have coming to them. Anyone who willingly partakes in the distribution of substances like meth that destroy lives is simply a piece of crap. But now to my real point: Sam Hurd wasn't addicted to marijuana. There is no substance in the cannabis plant that causes a human being to become physiologically addicted to it due to their repeated consumption of the plant in any form, be it through smoking or another method. Since my actual identity is in no way tied to my persona on this site, I have no problem admitting this here: I'm a daily marijuana smoker. I have been for about a year now, and the prior 6 or so months I was a 3-5 times per week smoker. Before I became a regular cannabis user, my GPA was 0.9 (no, seriously, it was that low). I was on the verge of failing out of UNT with no return on my initial $30,000 out-of-state tuition investment. Now? My GPA is up to a 2.95 after just 3 semesters of fixing things, I've had back to back semesters with a GPA of at least 3.25, and I made the Dean's List in this past semester. Am I claiming that marijuana saved my education? Absolutely not, and I'm not even insinuating a minor correlation between marijuana use and an increase in academic achievement, because that's just ludicrous. But what I am saying is that the long-held notions that marijuana makes one lazy, stupid, uninspired, useless, and a burden to society, are complete bullcrap. I can count the number of days that I smoked marijuana less than three times this past semester on one hand, and I made the Dean's List. I showed up to class high more than once, even got an A+ on two different precalculus exams that I did under the influence of marijuana. I could sit here and type out a 20,000 word essay on the history of the defamation of marijuana and the truth about the plant, filled with references to dozens of academic and medical journal publications backing up my information - I'm probably more knowledgeable about marijuana than I am about anything outside of weather, sports, and metal music - but that would be pointless. Instead, I'm just going to humbly ask all of you to seek out the truth about cannabis rather than buying into the propaganda that has led to the jailing of thousands and thousands of harmless people who have hurt nobody with their actions. It's a common saying within the marijuana counter-culture that the most dangerous thing about the plant is that it is illegal, and I completely agree with that. I can tell you from my own personal experience that the only withdrawal symptom I've experienced is slight insomnia, and that daily smoking has had hardly any effect on my lungs (the only thing I can note that has changed is an increase in mucus production, which is minorly annoying at worst), and that I've gone from nearly failing out of college to being a Dean's List student after becoming a regular toker. We're in the midst of a time in history where the public perception of cannabis is changing rapidly, which is great. But in a socially conservative state like Texas, that change is going to be met with extreme resistance, and the state will probably be one of the last to follow the "medical-decriminalization-legalization" model of marijuana legal reform. But it doesn't have to be that way. Look into the facts yourself, do some reading, some documentary-watching, hell even try some of the stuff yourself if you want. And then when the day inevitably comes that Texas finally starts putting some marijuana reform bills to vote, you'll have the knowledge to make a legitimate decision based on the facts. If you somehow come to the conclusion that it should be illegal after looking into it, then fine. But at least look into it. PS: I've never tried any other drug outside of medication prescribed to me from a medical professional, and alcohol. Marijuana has no link to cocaine and the harder stuff whatsoever. In my time smoking, I've never heard of anyone saying, "Man, weed just doesn't cut it anymore...I need some meth!" It just doesn't happen. People who smoke, like myself, do so for the effect, but also for the lack of after-effect. No other drug can offer an alternative state of mind without some kind of punishment later.

I've been wondering...do we have anyone on the team this year that could wind up being our first player to be drafted since...well, a long time? I've heard Antonio Johnson's name be tossed around, but that's going to be 2015 in all likelihood. What do you guys think?

I don't get why this is such a complicated issue. Anyone who doesn't think Benford is a terrible coach isn't rational. But anyone who thinks Tony Mitchell isn't to blame for Tony Mitchell's effort, or lack thereof, isn't rational either. I don't care how terrible a season is going. I don't care how much the rest of your team sucks, how much your coach sucks, how much your life sucks. The only one controlling a person's effort is that person, nothing and no one else dictates that. I'm incredibly disappointed that Tony mailed in this season to some extent. He should have enough respect for himself as a talented basketball player who had the potential to go top 10, maybe even top 5, and enough respect for his teammates and university, to give it his all this season. I'm not disagreeing with the fact that everyone takes a play off every now and then to catch their breath or whatever, that's human. But when it becomes noticeable, like it has here, there is definitely an issue. When the going gets tough, the tough get going. I may be 20 years old, but I'm not an idiot and I'm not naive. Giving anything but your best at whatever it is you do is to do a disservice to yourself and to those around you. Tony did a disservice to himself as his stock is lower and he has to deal with VERY avoidable questions being asked to him at this point. He did a disservice to his teammates by being a lazy excuse of a leader. And he did a disservice to his university by not respecting it enough to represent it to the best of his ability. This all seems negative and hateful. It isn't. I lived in the same dorm as Tony this year. He's a good guy, a kind-hearted and humble person. I wish him nothing but the best in the NBA and will absolutely be rooting for him going forward. But, I am absolutely disappointed with his lack of effort this season. He had the talent to overcome any bad coaching situation, but he let the bad start of the season and iffy coaching decisions get the best of him when it should have only motivated him to try even harder.

You aren't kidding. Yao Ming 2.0, just from India instead of China. Add another billion+ to the NBA's international market if he can make even a small name for himself in the NBA.

I don't fully agree with what your expectations are. With that being said, I think that we really could surprise some people this year. I'm guessing the 4-5 win range. But, I could see a max of around 8 or 9. The players are INCREDIBLY confident. You'll see a difference in their play this year I think. Whether or not that translates to wins on a tougher schedule, we'll see.

I'd seriously doubt they'd schedule it at noon. Whoever is in charge of that HAS to know that we'd be lucky to get 10,000 in the seats for an August game at noon. Gametime temp 100...rising to 110....yeah, they better not do that.

Eh...I get the argument about tradition and culture with uniforms. I do. But Oregon is unique. The constant changing of uniforms IS their culture, and new tradition. I don't know, maybe it's because I'm young and am not as partial to the older style uni's as some of you are. But, to me, we have no place to say Oregon lacks culture or tradition when they have 60,000 in the seats every weekend and have won more games in the past 2 seasons than we have in the past 8.

No offense, but I think it really might be only you who cares. Recruiting rankings are fun and all, and they're meaningful at the top where you have the 100 or so "elites". After that, everyone can play basketball and it is all about finding diamonds in the rough. Take soon-to-be rookie of the year Damian Lillard's case for example. 2 star prospect according to Rivals, best school to offer him was Wichita State, ended up at Weber State. 4 years later, the kid is a lottery pick, and going to be rookie of the year. Those rankings meant nothing. Oh, and what of Wichita State? They couldn't recruit Lillard over measly Weber State...surely they must be awful and still feeling the repercussions a few years later...oh crap, that's right, they went to the final four this year. My mistake. Looks like the schools that you beat out or lose out against in recruiting don't mean anything either. Seriously, you just sound like a whiny little girl. Get over it, you hate Benford. We all f'ing hate Benford...95% of us on this board would rather see the team coached by a TAMS student than Benford. But you don't see the rest of us making something out of nothing.

Hopefully this will spur Mac finally agreeing to change our hideous uniforms.

I watched the WAC championship game between UT Arlington and New Mexico State last night, as I'm sure at least a few of you guys did, and I was absolutely blown away by NMSU's freshman big man, Sim Bhullar. For those of you who don't know who he is, he's a 7'5" 355 pound center of Indian descent from Toronto. When I flipped on the game and saw him, I instantly was expecting a big, slow, clumsy, easily tired goon who was in there to take up space and rebound anything within his reach. Boy was I wrong, and I'm assuming every big-time college scout and coach was wrong about him too, otherwise he'd be on a much better team than NMSU. Double double by halftime, finished with something like 16 points and 15 rebounds, at least 4 or 5 blocks...the kid is legit. Relevant to UNT for a few reasons. One, I remember seeing a thread that said NMSU would announce a conference move sometime soon. If it, by some miracle, is C USA, be stoked, because you've then got 3 years of seeing this beast in person when we play NMSU. Two, WHY DIDN'T WE (and everyone else) GO AFTER THIS KID?? Three, WHY AREN'T WE GOING AFTER HIS 7'3" YOUNGER BROTHER, who is also being under recruited assuming he's remotely on the same level as Sim. Thoughts anyone?

I'd be so disappointed to see him hold this season against UNT...he's done a lot for the university already, but the university has also done a lot for him. UNT didn't have to take a chance on an academic nonqualifier with a shady academic past.

Boom or bust is the perfect description for TM...he's likely to go in the 20-30 range in the first round, or maybe even early second (doubtful as long as his workouts are still amazing), and whoever drafts him is either going to end up with a really good starter with the ceiling to be a star...or a taller, better defending Gerald Green.

You're slightly misinterpreting what I'm saying. He's absolutely the most improved player on the team and I'd be shocked if he wasn't the sole leader of the team next season. I'm not knocking him at all. It just irks me that he's dubbed himself a crowd favorite when he hasn't actually ever accomplished anything of significance The best leaders are the ones who keep their egos balanced.

John Wooden? If he thinks Benford did a good job, then he must think JJ is Jesus Christ himself.

Slightly off topic, but it troubles me that his instagram name is "crowdfavorite23". Get some Ws and some respect in your low-major conference before tooting your own horn, JW...otherwise, your continued improvement will mean nothing in the long run.

I understand what you're saying about the players. I live in the same dorm as them. And trust me, your judgment isn't far off. But the blame is always the coach. If JJ won with these guys, Benford can win with these guys. If he wants to be a stubborn jerk who won't continually change his coaching/motivating tactics to suit the situation and players he has, then he doesn't deserve to be a head coach. It's as simple as that.

I've got a couple problems with this. You imply that by disliking Benford, that one doesn't support the basketball team. Bullshit. I support UNT, I bleed green, but I will not waste two hours of my busy academic life to watch a joke of a team. A good job with what he had to work with? What the hell are you high on, meth??? Because I can be sober, drunk, or stoned, or some combination of the last two, and still know that Benford failed MISERABLY. Injuries, save for Walton, occurred far too late to be used as an excuse. Inheriting the most talented team in school history is not an excuse to suck. It shouldn't take half a brain to realize that. You also imply that by disliking Benford, one doesn't support RV. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I'm very anti-Benford and very pro-RV. False argument on your part. You also imply that by disliking Benford, one doesn't appreciate the amazing financial contributions of our donors. Also completely untrue. I'll forever appreciate those contributions and hope that I can one day do the same. But, if I recall...those donations were made before the trainwreck of a season was completely realized. Something tells me that Ernie still supporting Benford has a lot to do with the fact that he made a 7 figure contribution to the Benford led team, and not much to do with Benford's success. Which is fine, everyone should be able to completely understand that. I'd have a hard time dogging on someone who is benefiting from my recent multi-million dollar donation too. Hell, I'd have a hard time dogging on someone who is benifiting from my five dollar donation, because that would imply poor judgment initially on my part (regardless of whether it actually was poor or not), and it's human nature to resist that feeling. Finally, there are a lot more people wanting Benford gone than "15 people on this board". There are more people on this board who want Benford gone than there are people from Texas on this board. And trust me...this place isn't a great representative population of the student body; I learned that when I initially joined the board last summer expecting the demographics to reflect the current student body, which led to a collective opening of my poophole on multiple occasions. That's nothing negative about this board, not at all, just a fact that it doesn't represent the student body at all. And let me tell you, any student who is a fan of the basketball team wants Benford to get the hell away from our fine university as quickly as possible before we're subjected to basketball seasons that rival the football seasons of the 2005-2010 timeframe. The donors, RV, athletic dept., university officials, etc., can deny that Benford is a worthless head coach all they want, but it doesn't change the fact that he is indeed a worthless head coach. Perhaps I'll be fiending enough for basketball by the time next season starts that I'll get sucked into the "We won't suck again!!" hype and go to a couple games. But, if the season started today, I'd have a hard time motivating myself to even check the scores, let alone go to a game.

I don't understand your point. Or your analogy. RV deserves a ton of credit for Apogee. HE'S THE FREAKING ATHLETIC DIRECTOR. Anything that happens, good or bad, he is more accountable for than anyone else, save for situations when a donor or donors step up a huge amount of money for something that would not have happened otherwise. I don't think Apogee falls into that category considering the amount of money the students contributed. I personally credit Bush, Obama, the SEAL team, and everyone else involved, for the Bin Laden killing. Obama was commander in chief at the time, top dog. Bush was top dog in the hunt for 7 years. He deserves a lot of credit as well. The SEAL team carried out the mission. They deserve an incredible amount of credit. No big action is the result of one entity. It takes a team. If this is the point you're trying to get across, then I apologize for challenging your point with your point, and I also prod you to clarify your point a little better my friend. If not, then well, my challenge stands.

Good god...I really have been away from the site for quite awhile because I had no idea about my prediction being an infamous representation of this horrid season. Yes...yes we did. Such a sad season...

Well said. For me personally, my opinion on RV hinges entirely on him retaining/firing Benford. If he retains Benford I'll be all over the "Fire RV" bandwagon, unless Benford somehow turns it around of course. But if Benford is fired, I'll be remaining in the pro-RV camp for the time being.

This got me thinking....maybe we should challenge Benford to do WORSE next season. Tell him to shoot for 5 wins. Perhaps he'll try so hard at sucking that he'll "leave players in for too long" to tire them out (translation: he'll substitute at a normal rate). Or maybe he'll talk down about the team in public hoping to demean them, but in turn motivating them? I don't know. I don't even know if this made sense. Nothing makes sense after this season. I'm still trying to comprehend what happened.