peanuts104

It's not that I'm upset that we've gone 9-4. I am over the moon with the leaps and strides we have made in two seasons. I'm upset that we could not adjust our team to be more competitive this go around with FAU. It points to a coaching issue that needs to be corrected next season.

I think it's safe to say that you enjoy losing. The head coach is fine. Reffett has improved from being embarrassed earlier in the season. Harrell wants to throw the ball on every down. You can't do that if they drop 7 almost every play. They took advantage of the fact that we make a lot of production on the air, and like I've said, either in this thread or others, we went away from the ground game WAY TOO EARLY.

Then how the **** did we hang 31 on them in October. It wasn't our receivers! The play calling was garbage and easy enough to pick up for the defense.

Did you watch the Army game?! No they are not.

I didn't make my point clear enough. Our offensive statistics weren't horrible despite our offense being ineffective. That points to inconsistency and poor play calling. They were fast on offense for sure (but, if you noticed they slowed as the game grew long in the tooth), but they were not faster than us on their defense vs our offense. We just did not scheme the game right as far as the offensive side of the ball goes, and that is on Harrell.

What else would you call it? He made it happen. It doesn't mean we couldn't have been better. Especially because we got away from the run game way too early. Overall the offense was inconsistent. We'd make big plays and make nothing out of those big plays. The whole thing was like kicking a ball as far as you can into a wall back to your own side. We beat ourselves.

They played faster on offense than our defense. I don't deny that. Their defense did not play faster than our offense. It could have been a shoot out, especially considering our offensive numbers weren't awful. I'm not denying the deficiencies on defense, just pointing out our offense could have helped keep us in the game with the talent we have.

#OldDenton

Our quarterback threw for over 300 yards. Talent isn't the issue. Play calling and scheming is the issue.

This. Our defensive staff was mediocre (better than the last game) and YOU CANNOT WIN A GAME GOING 0-27 IN THE FIRST HALF. The offensive play calling was garbage (not enough runs called in the first half) and Harrell REALLY needs to look at his play calling (as do the rest of the staff and if Harrell is worth keeping as OC). 0-27 in the first half with a QB that threw for 300+ yards in a blow out loss is unacceptable. Absolutely unacceptable.

Brett, was going to post that before you did. You have done an excellent job at covering mean green sports other than football this year, even if others haven't noticed. My dig is at your targeted attack at the idea SL will stick around. I wouldn't be surprised if he left, but with what he's gotten moving here (the indoor practice field, for starters, along with the seemingly full support of the AD and the board), I wouldn't be surprised if he decided to stick it out for another couple of years at least. We will likely lose him at some point, but the only thing I've seen in the news is a few columnists saying that he might be a decent fit at XYZ school. And also, frankly, I'm not sure C-USA is well respected enough around the P5 programs for SL to warrant much notice, despite the excellent job he's done here so far.

If he leaves for a better offer, he leaves. He's got a lot going for him here. The AD appears to love him, the board appears to love him. He's basically got free reign here at this point (like Patterson at TCU). He won't have that anywhere else. SL knows that. And it comes back to that age old question of whether that redshirt sophomore should enter the draft. Could they mature a couple more seasons where they are and get the experience they need to survive at the next level or could they make the jump and hope they can swim. I wouldn't dare blame SL for taking a better offer. This is a game and he should be paid on his performance. I want to hold onto him, and I hope he sees the advantages of staying here, but if he leaves for an offer (and he will get at least a few this season), then he leaves. Unless we all want to chip in thousands of dollars into the "keep SL here" fund, it's out of the fans, and to an extent, the university's hands. One observation I will make is that looking at his past stops, he didn't have much personal connection to location. He seems to have a personal tie here with the northern Texas region and Oklahoma. Unless Tech offers him, which they very well might, I think there's a good chance he stays. Side note, Brett should take this story down. It is speculative trash. Lots of research about past coaches and players but very little into SL.

Mark Ingram reminds me a lot of another dead weight AD that we just got rid of.... Bottom line, this is all hype. Hype is rarely returned without substance. They have not played two seasons and will be drained of all talent. They will not be competitive. Don't believe the hype.

As far as giant question marks go, I tend to believe they are busts more often than they are diamonds in the rough. Restarting a program is difficult no matter the circumstances. Just look at SMU($$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$).

This is my first post. Cool. So, using some internet magic, UNT owns this land it seems. So it seems it is within the universities power to make it not an eyesore (AKA make it an alternative tailgate place or something else cool).