NT93

Kind of like Patterson. He surely could have moved on, but seems happy where he's at. I would love for this to be true...if we're winning of course.

My biggest concern with Meacham is that he's been coaching a while to have never been a head coach. An OC since '94, but never a HC? Could be a legitimate reason(s), but it's a red flag to me.

nm

This X 1,000,000

Have you talked to an A&M fan lately?? LOL

How soon they forget. It wasn't long ago that TCU was perpetually bad.

He's been near the top of my list before Mac was even let go. I'd be happy with this hire.

RV and his damn weather

Agree, but the triple option would immediately make our defense better by keeping them off the field for longer periods of time.

Obviously not Mean Green related, but a good discussion nonetheless. No telling what "The Committee" will do this week, but I have a feeling two, maybe three teams are going to get in the playoffs that probably couldn't finish in the top 4 in the SEC, Big 12, or maybe even Pac 12. The Big 12 has four solid teams, none of which are going to get in. I don't think Clemson, Notre Dame, or Iowa could go through the Big 12 with less than 2 losses and they'd likely have 3 or 4. Same if they were in the SEC West. Playoff needs to have 6 teams with the conference champions, plus 1...preferably the top G5 school (which will never happen).

This may be the best post ever regarding DT.

You guys who don't think it was a respectable effort do realize we were a 41 point underdog??? We played one of our closest games of the year on the road against an SEC team. Considering what a bad team we are this year, I have to think this outcome exceeded everyone's expectations. I don't think anyone is happy about losing 24-0, we are just happy not to lose 66-7. It's not what we want, but it's the reality of this season.

If he happens to be the same guy I saw at the game then the answer is yes. Being a fan of both ok, but it would seem as though you'd put on your UNT hat when visiting here.

Not in favor of Canales for head coach, but you have to look at more than just his winning percentage. That's very short sighted. Twice he has taken terrible teams and had them play respectable ball. In 2010 he lost to our conference champion (Troy) by 6 points, to K-St by 8 points, and ULM by 12 points in addition to winning at WKU and MTSU. His record was 2-3, but that's a fairly impressive 2-3 considering the team and the opponents. In 2015 so far he has lost to the two best teams in our conference and beaten arguably the worst team in our conference (Charlotte might have something to say about that). He'll almost certainly lose to possible conference champion LaTech and Tennessee. For the sake of argument let's say we beat MTSU and UTEP. As you said that's a 3-4 record, but just like 2010, that's a fairly impressive record considering the team and the opponents. I still say there's not a coach out there who would have a better winning percentage taking over the same teams and playing the same schedules.

This kind of got me excited so I guess that means I'd be happy if he were to get the job. By contrast, a post the other day about Briles made me a bit uneasy. As I mentioned before, Briles was who I initially thought of when I heard the news about Mac. I guess Riley is the leader in the clubhouse for me, but there are a few names mentioned that I would be on board with as well.

False. UNT90's opinion is fact

http://www.ohiostatebuckeyes.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/tim_beck_945373.html Super long shot candidate. He's older (but not near retirement), plenty of college experience at big name programs, success as a Texas high school coach and already has relationships with Texas high school coaches. He won't even get an interview, but I thought he was interesting based on what I've seen in various threads about what some people want in the next head coach.

Mac was sold to this fan base as a guy who can take a moribund program and turn it into a winner due to his "success" at Iowa St and subsequent success with the Florida program. We both agree that he was not a winner, but that doesn't change the fact that he was presented to this fan base as a winner. As a matter of fact, I heard somewhere that he won a National Championship at Florida. I think he even has a ring. lol

Nope, don't think I'm ignoring it since I addressed it in my response. The university sold him as a "winner" who can turn a program around because of the winning seasons he had at Iowa St. You read it here, but it's from 2010. I thought the same thing until Harry pointed out he's 32.

Isn't that who we hired last time? I would disagree about the "winner face on the program," but the powers that be thought Mac had that quality.

I'm "arguing" because you keep referencing my quotes acting like I think Canales is football Jesus. If you're just now getting that I don't think Canales should be the next head coach then it's obvious you haven't been reading the posts of mine that you've quoted. You don't like him. I get it. We just disagree because I think he should be given his due for improving our team this year. Are we a good team? Of course not, but I don't think we're the worst FBS in the country anymore and four weeks ago I don't think that was even up for debate.

Yes, because Chico is solely responsible for every offensive recruit that has been brought in the past six years. If that's the case, you should be the one praising him based on the teams performance the past few weeks. You quote me, but your reply has little to do with anything I wrote. Did you even read what I wrote? "I'm simply saying the schedule has not been kind and the best we could hope for is a 1-2 record regardless of who was coaching." I'm thinking on the planet that has seen improved play the past three weeks compared to the first five. I've stated numerous times that I don't think Canales should be our next head coach.

Great point. There's not a coach in America that would be better than 1-2 with that schedule. I'm not saying that means Canales is among the best coaches in America. I'm not saying we should hire him because he beat a 1-6 UTKFC. I'm simply saying the schedule to this point hasn't been kind and the best we could hope for is a 1-2 record regardless of who was coaching. That being said, I think there are plenty of coaches who'd have gone 0-3. I fully expect that he'll be 1-4 after two weeks and that will have very little to do with coaching and more to do with getting beaten by two far superior teams. There are many good teams in college football who would go 0-4 in that stretch of games (on the road at WKU, Marshall, LaTech, UT). We all knew before the season that the schedule was doing us no favors.

He was first name that came to mind when I heard Mac had been fired, but I'm not so sure now. He has a lot of positives, but the huge negative to me is lack of head coaching experience. That makes it a very risky hire, but the reward could also be great.

It agree that it shouldn't be our standard in the future, but this year I think keeping it competitive (lose by 10 or less) when we are a 30 point underdog would be a fairly high expectation. Also, I have yet to see anyone say that they think we'll beat MTSU, so I think that would be pretty good. Obviously we're not beating Tennessee, so make a good showing there. I just think for a team that started off 0-6 and got beat by at least 14 in all six of those losses, my scenario would be over-achieving for this team..