HarringtonFishSmeller

I weep for the future...especially if you admit that you listen to "music" known as Red Dirt Country while hating jazz. It's one of the two consistent errors in judgement Jub makes. The other is his propensity to defend boy bands.

His dad was from Muskogee, he's from Muskogee. I'm assuming his wife is as well because they were married at the First Baptist Church in Muskogee; normally, in those parts, you marry at the girl's church: http://www.muskogeephoenix.com/community/blackwell-littrell-marry-on-july/article_1e0d5fca-236d-5741-81e6-a16d19f59712.html (It's pretty awesome that they were married on 7-7-2007 at 7 p.m. Gotta like this guy's planning!) Grandma's obit reveals that the family is likely heavily of the Baptist ilk, and for many years: http://www.cornerstoneofmuskogee.com/obituaries/Bertha-Littrell/#!/Obituary That will play well to recruits here, inasmuch as the Baptist brand is popular among church-goers in these here parts as well.

Who says we haven't? Just because we've offered doesn't mean he'd immediately accept. Ditto for Meacham. Problem for us is, we are treated third class. We need talent. Our recruiting is thin already, and the days are burning. These two candidates, who are good choices, have essentially put us on hold. So, where does that really put us with them? They obviously consider us a fallback if other things don't work out. Would help to know that there is a third or fourth candidate out there ready to sign up and lead. Totally understand Littrell's situation and, potentially, Meacham's. But, here is where you tell either, "Fish or cut bait. Our program is important as well." Remember, we waited and waited and waited for Dodge to finally finish his high school season, and lost valuable recruiting time. Much of that initial Dodge signing class quit. Meacham and Littrell are great coaches. But, with scholarships as important as they are, I doubt recruits just sit and wait to see who is named head coach at UNT. Other coaches will use are void against us in recruiting.

If it's Littrell, something has to be done about recruiting pronto. Especially if North Carolina "upsets" Clemson and the Tar Heels get into the playoff. Again, we appear to be in good hands either way. I think both a equally capable. My desire is to have someone recruiting yesterday, given what we have on the roster at QB and DL. The longer we wait, the shorter the early JUCO signee window becomes as well.

No. There's no reason for Smith to ever see the field again if the new coach can sign quarterbacks who are able and dedicated to playing the position.

Iowa State should be in the MAC, so the hire makes sense.

I just think the timing for us is better with Meacham. He can hit the ground running now as opposed to January or two weeks from now. Littrell is probably better nationally. Meacham, to me, is not a national guy. His been in this region so long, I doubt he has the national ties Littrell does. Littrell, to me, makes more sense at a more national school. Meacham's experience is in this region, extensively. I understand the importance of grabbing guys out of state. Meacham, I think, has enough ties in Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana and more in Texas. Again, both would be great hires; but, for this time and place, I hope it's Meacham for the sake of getting this thing off the ground as soon as possible.

Littrell goes here; especially if UNC upsets Clemson.

I really am excited that these are our two finalists. But, here is why I currently favor Meacham: -Recruiting - His season is done As to recruiting, Littrell has been at programs that lean on much out of state talent - except, obviously his stint at Texas Tech. He would be strong nationally. Meacham, on the other hand, has been recruiting in Texas for over a decade straight among stint at OSU, Houston, and TCU. Both are great. But, as good as Littrell is, my feeling is that Meacham has been tapping the Texas prep level on a more consistent and ongoing basis. Finally, Meacham is available now. North Carolina still has a conference championship to play. And, if they upset #1 ranked Clemson in that game, they will likely be in the CFP. That would mean Littrell unable to get here until January. My feeling is that we need someone on the ground YESTERDAY! Meacham, he's already here and he can begin recruiting tomorrow. We need a huge influx of talent and direction. It can't begin soon enough. Again, I think it's a push as to the talent level of these two coaches. They are outstanding choices. Right now, though, all things being equal, we need someone RIGHT NOW! The circumstances being what they are, give me Meacham...and, preferably tonight or tomorrow.

Completely fine with Meacham or Applewhite.

I think these "coaching search" websites are full of crap. But, the idea is to get clicks. Hmmm...idea...make my own "coaching search/rumor" website! Yeah! That's the ticket!

Matt Wells is making $750k at Utah State, but is from this region. Quick Notes: -Prepped in Oklahoma. -Played QB in college.- -Assisted at Navy under Charlie Weatherbie (http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/coaching/alltime_coach_year_by_year.php?coachid=2456) -Assisted at Tulsa and Louisville under Steve Kragthorpe (http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/coaching/alltime_coach_year_by_year.php?coachid=2833) -Assisted at New Mexico under Rocky Long (http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/coaching/alltime_coach_year_by_year.php?coachid=1398) -Assisted at Utah State under Gary Anderson (http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/coaching/alltime_coach_year_by_year.php?coachid=2848_ That is a pretty solid assembly of mid-major coaches he's worked for. So, he'd certainly understand the mid-major level recruiting. Navy, Tulsa, Louisville, New Mexico, and Utah State may not sound sexy. But, under those coaches, those programs had success or built up to success. Got no information that says this is the guy. But, you look at his pay, his background, and vicinity of his familiar roots, and it wouldn't be hard to conclude that this is a guy that maybe you'd target as a head coach who already has experience as a head coach. I'll guarantee you this: His first year at Tulsa, 2002, was my last year there. I assure you, the facilities were worse than we have here, and the morale among both boosters and many of the board was much worse - they were seriously talking up dropping football down to I-AA. So, he's seen far worse than what he'd step into on Day One here.

He says all the right things - up tempo offense; make the defense defend the whole field on every play; have an offensive plan, but tailor it to the player you have, not that ones you had at another school, etc. Sounds good:

I'd be happy with Littrell. Guy played fullback in college, so you know he'd expect toughness from the team. Fullbacks are generally no non-sense guys.

Either a few hours after Saturday's game or Sunday. I just feel that we're pretty close it. I also am having jitters about the hire. I want a better offense, but am being swayed that a young guy may be too young to turn the entire thing around. About the future offense, I think we're fine everywhere except quarterback...which is a big exception. Everywhere else, we have have good young talent. About the future defense, I feel just the opposite. I don't think we've shown good young talent there. Yes, we have two safeties in the Top 10 in the country in tackles...but, when your safeties are making the majority of the tackles, it means the front seven aren't doing a great job. Special teams seem solid. We are hyper focused on the offense. To me, though, the defense is what really needs a huge boost in terms of talent. If we hire a young coach who is too offensive-minded, does our situation on defense ever get fixed? To me,the nightmare scenario is Dodge II occurring: We score a lot of points, put up a lot of yards...and, yet, still lose alot of games. Peace, out.

Again...we could well end up with a less-heralded guy. Memphis' Cornselsen, North Carolina's Littrell, Arizona State's Thomsen. Not that those would be bad hires. But, to some folks here who think we would magically be first in line for any coach in the country will not be happy. Maybe they'll pipe down after the new coach does some winning.

It'll be cold and rainy. We are what we are. UTEP is what it is. I'm still going to try to make it. Wife will not want the kids out in it, so I'll smuggle my boy out under some false pretense and be there.

Interesting post because I've heard Joel Klatt say that in order to really have a successful spread, you have to be able to out-athlete the your opponents' secondaries week in and week out. As posted before, we don't have the athletes to do it. We put up many yards and points with Todd Dodge, but still lost a lot of games. The years we have gone to bowls games, we've been more balanced, but with good, strong run games. In a way, I agree with you. I wouldn't go whole hog to the triple option. But, I'd like to see that kind of balance we had in the early 00s with Hall-Cobb/Galbreath-Marshall/Quinn/Blount and 2013 with Thompson-Byrd/Jimmerson-Chancellor/Smith 2001: 141 passing yards per page, 160 rushing Hall - 1,453 passing yards, 17 TDs, 11 Ints Galbreath - 1,119 yards, 4 TDs rushing Marshall 546 yards, 11 TDs receiving 2002: 108 passing, 182 rushing Smith - 1,080 passing, 7 TDs, 8 Ints Galbreath - 1,168 yards, 8 TDs, rushing Cobbs - 732 yards, 7 TDs, rushing Marshall - 377 yards, 2 TDs receiving Branch - 357 yards, 2 TDs receiving 2003: 149 passing, 179 receiving Hall - 1,580 passing, 13 TDs, 5 Ints Cobbs -1,570, 17 TDs rushing Quinn - 653, 3 TDs receiving Blount - 359, 5 TDs receiving 2004: 157 passing, 186 rushing Hall - 1,818 passing, 14 TDs, 4 Ints Thomas - 1,801 rushing, 17 TDs rushing Quinn - 785, 9 TDs receiving Blount - 427, 5 TDs receiving 2013: 229 passing, 180 rushing Thompson - 2,896 passing, 16 TDs, 13 Ints Byrd -1,075, 11 TDs rushing Jimmerson - 446, 7 TDs rushing Pegram - 338, 6 TDs rushing Chancellor - 792, 4 TDs receiving Smith - 791, 4 TDs receiving Harris - 553, 2 TDs receiving So, anyway. During the seasons we've been to bowls, we had pretty decent run games, and somewhat decent passing. As much as we castigate Dickey and McCarney as "run-first" coaches, the 2013 squad under McCarney had more yards through the air. With Dickey, Scott Hall developed into a pretty efficient passer who "drove the bus and took care of the ball" when not handing it off to Cobbs or Thomas...or Galbreath. The other thing is, we had excellent defenses during the Dickey bowl seasons, and a salty defense in 2013 with McCarney. I'll be just as excited to get a "spread coach" as the next guy. But, the truth is, many schools run some form of spread without great success because they don't have the athletes year in and year out to win consistently with it. These days, there are many good runners out there that get overlooked during the recruiting process because of the prevalence of the spread in the high schools. In my heart, I know we will not get the talent to be a top spread team. We might win here and there with it. In the Big 12, Texas Tech has been married to it for well over a decade now, but have no Big 12 titles to show for it...because, they don't get the best athletes that compete at that level. I'd like to see, honestly, the offense we had in 2013 paired with our 2003 and 2004 defenses. Is that too much to ask?

They are Big 12, so higher up in the pecking order than us for coaches looking to move up.

I really do like Mike, but... ...if he looked at the QBs on the roster before the season and saw anything even remotely resembling success, well...there is Exhibit 1-A as to why he should not be our head coach. As I've said before, I think all of those guys would be fine FCS or D-II quarterbacks. And, so, if Canales really believes they could have put together a successful season for us, then I fully support his candidacy to be a head coach at an FCS or D-II school.

I hate buzzwords. I've run off company reps who have called saying the just wanted to "reach out" to me. I've told them all, don't "reach" anywhere near me. Send over your company's appetite, guidelines, and annual requirements, and that's that. Another one a little while back was "platforms." We're going to explore this or that on a different platform. Look, you're not exploring it in any different way. You are either accepting the class of business as a risk or you are not. Middle management may have sent you on a some Quixotic platform goose chase; but, no one else is following along, sonny boy. The actuaries and accountants will rule the day; don't f'ing give me this "platforms" bullsh*t. Tell me what your company wants written and get out of the way of our agency and the underwriters. And, the "core values"...is there anything more phony? You and I are all trying to make/keep our enterprises profitable. I understand you have to now dress it up a little for the sake of...whom? Marketing professors? Sociologists? Get real. At the "end of the day," if I'm not performing, you are going to "cut me loose." And, I'm going to be the same way with you...no matter which "core values" we "share." So, freaking phony. It's the 21st Century's "mission statement" that "core value" hooey. Another big one is "added value." I went round and round for about 10 minutes one day with a kid trying to get me to ditch our current management system and use theirs. I kept trying to get him to tell me what the major difference was between the two systems, and he kept at me with this, "Our system gives your customer added value." How? He didn't know. He kept going down the list of things our current management system already does - or, that were available directly from the insurers. Again and again: Son, how does it "add value" again? Um...(says list of things our current system already does) Son, our current system already does those things. So, tell me the cost per person/desk. Well, ours "adds value" for your customers, so it's this many dollar more than you are paying for your current system. Stupid.

We sat in the rain last year for the FIU game. Guess we can do the same for UTEP. Wife will probably balk. But, the kids are still at an age where they like to run around in the rain. So, we'll probably be there - rain or shine. Snow...eh...that would be a problem.

At the meetings, do they have cookies and muffins and coffee and whatnot on hand?

Wow and I forgot this guy Spencer Leftwich: http://www.utepathletics.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/spencer_leftwich_833892.html

Hi, fellas. I wasn't really touting these guys as head coaches. Was just sorting through what is out there as far as former UNT players and coaches. Please add to the list if you know of any more. That being said, I do believe Freddie Kitchens is interesting. Whether he'd be interested in jumping back down to the collegiate ranks is another question. I'm so out of tune with the NFL that I have no idea what the assistants make up there. Surely, it's got to be about what a head coach makes at most colleges, probably more. Harry, maybe you all can come up with a place on the website - because, you know...we all know you guys have tons of free time to just screw with the website - that shows what former players and coaches are doing football-wise, whether it's linking the current NFL and CFLers as well as where former players and coaches are coaching.