eulessismore

I guess I'd be ok with them being Middle Tennessee University, that would get rid of the "State", and would roll off the tongue a little easier as "MTU" than "UMT"

I thought we only had 5 games left. If we play 6 more football games this year, then Canales will have done some pretty amazing things.

Wins=good

And why is UNTLifer so down on that. I just don't get it.

Oh, and no thread is complete without a Bleacherreport article (although I don't think his analysis of home field advantage is all that great; I mean it can feel pretty dang cold out there in San Francisco, even though it's not Candlestick). According to this guy, we can still win: Bleacherreport article on World Series home field advantage

Hopefully after the Rangers win a World Series.

What about 1 or 2 stupidass threads that go on so long you can't remember whether it's 1 thread or 5? Oh, and I'm in favor of leaving the Blakeley pic up there for a while. He can serve as an example to us that somebody can be a great coach, a great guy, and know how to have fun. Rangers fans need to remember 1 thing here: we're in the World Series, and it's ok to party.

When I started coursework for my major in geography, one of the professors let it be known that he and another geography faculty member were scorers at the home basketball games, broadly hinting that it would be a good idea for us to attend the games. So I did, and what a great time it was! His teams had a fast and aggressive style, and you always felt like we would win (since we usually did). I'm thinking that one of his assistants was Billy Tubbs, who went on to later fame at TCU and Oklahoma. Tubbs taught a swimming class I took one summer, and he's another guy I'll always have fond memories of. I read somewhere that upon being fired by the recently hired President, Al Hurley (I think we didn't quite win 20 games that year, after we almost always did), Blakeley said something like, "he's ex-military, and I don't salute". Great man, great coach, great sense of humor.

I'm with you on these two, with this exception: Tommy Bowden is my favorite. However, I'm considering him a longshot at this point, since he does not seem to have been making any effort to become employed as a football coach since leaving Clemson. Of course, he left there with plenty of money, and doesn't seem to have spent much time west of the Mississippi, so I'm putting Coach Fran at the top of my list, since he has spent time in Texas and still lives here. Also, his history of turning programs around is (and I'm agreeing with others it seems different from starting from scratch) is a good attribute for us. The one thing I wonder about is his steady rise through New Mexico and TCU, followed by seeming disappointments with winning records at Alabama and Texas A&M. My theory is that the expectations game at those places can be unrealistic at times, whereas New Mexico and TCU were probably thrilled to be seeing a reasonably good chance of winning consistently. Really, even New Mexico took 10 years or so after he left to run their program back into the ground.

Do you really think that's a good idea? Actually, he's probably easy to find, like maybe on the roster of USF. He's had enough legal advice that he probably ain't talking to us. Maybe one of us could ask some of the assistant coaches not retained by Skip Holtz if they'd like to work for Leavitt again. Some of them seemed on a pretty good career path before all this went down, and their professional behavior in salvaging the USF recruiting class was duly noted by Holtz, although he wanted to bring in his own guys. How the USF 2010 recruiting class was saved.

Maybe GMG members should start dining at some of the nicer eating establishments in Denton over the next month.

Well, Calipari has been spectacularly successful and has coached some of the most controversial and sanctioned teams in NCAA hoops history (although the NCAA has pointed out that he himself has not been "indicted"). Perhaps we should see Calipari as a study in whether getting the wins in enough. I still think Rawlins is justifiable in his pride in that hire, but wonder why the problems (seemingly caused by the players, but in one case resulting from a test score that wasn't known by anyone until the season was well underway) seemed to follow Calipari. In the universe of college basketball, he's probably found his perfect place at Kentucky. I think a fairly thorough reading of Rawlins tenure at Washington State shows great interest by Rawlins in their football program, but the one hire made while he was there, Bill Doba, was considered pretty much a slam dunk internal hire, with Rawlins basically approving the process without being too involved, except as an enthusiastic supporter of WSU football. After he left, the next President was nowhere near as supportive, and Doba, who only had one winning season (his first, with Mike Prices recruits), and on at 6-6. Doba was fired after going 30-29 in five seasons, replaced by Paul Wulff, who, is 4-28 midway through his third season, and may provide us some (small) comfort in achieving a lower winning percentage over 3 years than Todd Dodge before he's done, probably at the end of this season. One lesson I think in all this is, and I think Rawlins has been pointing this out, is that we need to get this right; for one thing, he probably wants to retire before too long, and for another, we really need to change our overall level of support. And, we'd better pray that the next President has the interest and knowledge in sports that Rawlins does.

That was the one on his list I would eliminate first. I'm surprised Arkansas let him stay for a second year, much less start the third (barely).

I know what you mean; I thought until the weekend I went to the FIU game on homecoming weekend that we'd figure out a way to win. Once, I followed someone with their right turn signal on for what must have been 20 miles once; I finally had to turn off, but until then, I really thought they would "turn a corner". I guess they were like the driver George Carlin once described as "driving around the world".

There would be mass hysterics among members of Ponyfans, I'm pretty sure. I guess everybody likes a good laugh.

This guy seems like he's been keeping the kind of low profile that it seems like someone with a buyout the size of his could manage; not much on the Internet about him, only a speech in a Florida Baptist church within the last year, as far as doing anything, but as far as winning consistently, in and out of conference, and bowl eligibility every year he's coached, I think he's the man. Tommy Bowden's wiki bio

I'll have to agree that they use the term "witness" in a way that is different from my general understanding of its meaning, but even in criminal law, there is the use of "expert witnesses" who don't see "the incident". It's hard to be impressed with the quality of the "report", but I just don't think supporters of UNT Football would be realistic in dismissing the potential problems that hiring Leavitt poses as insignificant. I'm kind of taking the view of someone here who mentioned that a second chance is best to be given after the original problem is resolved. One thing that did come out in the report that I had been wondering about (although his listing as a "witness" confuses the issue, but only slightly) was whether Canales was actually there at the time the "incident" occurred. I now conclude that everything indicates he was not. I had heard somewhere that the other USF coaches not retained by Skip Holtz have not been hired to comparable positions, and wonder now if their proximity to said "incident" may be a reason for that. It sounds like, at the minimum, assuming this goes to trial, that they would likely be called as witnesses.

They also listed the player's father, who was not in the locker room at the time, and Trooper Hypes, who informed them that he was on vacation that day, so was nowhere near the locker room. I'm no lawyer, or otherwise qualified about legal matters, but the term "witness" as used in the report does not appear to require someone to see or even be at the location of the incident. Unless otherwise persuaded, I'm like TFLF, just not seeing that hiring Leavitt without at least some indication of when there might be closure in the pending lawsuit. I do think there is a problem in civil, as compared to criminal law, in that there's no "speedy trial" requirements (that I know of anyway). Anyway, I'm fairly certain that (1.) President Rawlins has to approve this hire and (2.) The Board of Regents has to approve the proposed increased compensation increases for a head coach and assistants. No matter how free a hand Rawlins gives RV in the HC hire, getting that increase to pay a coach with these kinds of unresolved legal issues seems like it would be an uphill battle.

I think a more complete reading of the documents posted by The Fake Lonnie Finch this would lead to the conclusion that Canales was NOT a "witness" to the "incident". The following is from the report conducted by the University of South Florida: "Coach Mike Canales was also interviewed. It was discovered that he was not in the locker room at the time the event at issue occurred. At halftime, he enters the locker area only to use a “white board” to speak to offensive position Student Athletes about second half plans. But Canales said that at a “tailgate” which is attended by assistant coaches after games at Raymond James, “someone” said that Coach Leavitt had “gotten after somebody in the locker room.” 15 Later he heard from Coach Franks that Student Athlete A had spoken to Leavitt and Canales thought the matter had been resolved. Canales also reported that after the publication of the FanHouse piece, both Student Athlete A and Student Athlete B came to him separately and said they were sorry for everything that “this” has caused. Canales said he told the Student Athletes to just tell the truth and everything will be okay." The above (in quotes) is the only part of that report in which I saw Canales name mentioned. If there is some other part of those documents that says otherwise, please point it out.

To me, the only conclusion to these legal matters that would make it acceptable for UNT to hire Leavitt would be one similar to a wrongful termination case appeal at my workplace, in which the person winning the appeal asked (only) for a favorable letter of reference. His coworkers thought he was crazy not to go for the money, or for getting his old job back, but I passed him on the street one day when he stopped me to explain his case: that all he wanted to do was work in his chosen profession, which he was able to do thanks to that letter. The singer Van Morrison took a similar tack is suing a British tabloid successfully for libel, with the requirement (only) that the newspaper issue a full page retraction and apology for running a baseless story that he had had an affair with Linda Gail Lewis, his longtime partner in vocal duets. Though there were other named parties and perhaps monetary damage from those, I think Morrison showed that there was more to it than money. That "something" is the value of a person's good name. Those in public life must get beyond thinking that a "not guilty" finding in a criminal case, or a successful finding of damages in a civil suit are not necessarily enough to get their careers back on track. Sometimes the air must be cleared; if not to completely prove that "nothing" took place, at least enough to provide some breathing room for their next employer. Remember this from what RV said in his "Barbershop" question and answer; the next coach will have public speaking requirements. If the first question in any follow up to a speaking engagement is always, "what happened back there in the locker room at South Florida", there will be problems.

Well, I've thought about that lately. I do have one thing to say about that: I'm 63 now, so probably won't make it another 39 years to see UNT win in a bowl game.

I advocate creation of a blue ribbon commission (Earl Warren, are you out there?)or a special senate subcommittee on character assassination of coaches.

I agree with the assessment of Dodge as setting a good example on character issues. However, and Dodge himself said something when his hire was announced words to the effect that "we can win and do it right". We need to do things right and also win. These are not mutually exclusive goals.

Would he also coach the O line?

He'll start looking and feeling better. Amazing what getting away from stress can do.