UNT86

Just thinking that unless Cal, Stanford, Washington State, and/or Oregon State swallow a lot of pride and join the WAC, that each of them may be looking for 5 games just to fill the schedule. They can still play the non-conference they have contracted and play each other for 3 of the remaining 8 games. After that, what? So, do we bump someone in an upcoming season to get them to come here? Do we even offer a return trip? Do we insist on playing in DATCU first? A lot of dominoes still have to fall, but these guys could be in a lot of trouble just filling out a schedule (see NT 1995 for reference).

Maybe some of those sports could become club sports? That is what the rest of us do. Maybe they could drop some men's sports so they can remain Title IX compliant? It will all be fine. Maybe some day you can bring those sports back....

I feel zero sadness for Cal, Stanford, Washington State, and Oregon State joining the MWC and getting their $4 million payout. They have had a "let them eat cake" attitude toward the rest of us from the beginning. Now, they just don't know how they will make it hosting Boise State and San Diego State. How will their fan base get excited? How will their Olympic sports get by? Lots of pearl clutching and hand wringing along the coast right now. I say thoughts and prayers boys. And welcome to the world all the rest of us live in.

The scheme would work. The problem is recruiting kids to play in a physical, run based offense. Also, fans get really upset when you run the ball too much... even when you win. So, butts in the seats is also a factor. Scheduling is another factor. I coached at a school that ran a version of the wing bone including the triple option and the midline. We sometimes had a hard time scheduling non-district games because our offense was unique, physical, and hard to stop. We had to travel from Dallas to Huntsville and College Station at times just to fill our schedule. The scheme is still sound and hard to defend. Also, most guys that know how to defend are retired.

NT Athletics cannot paint a wall or drive a nail in the pit without approval from the academic side of the university. It is why the sound system has sucked for years and never gets any better. It is why major renovations are extremely difficult. Athletics has wanted a weight room for basketball in the Pit forever and finally got the university to let them have an old, unused racquetball court. It is way too small, but better than what they had. And yes, athletics has been bumped from using the pit. It happened a few years ago when our womens basketball had to play a home game at TWU because the university had scheduled another event in the Pit and it was unavailable for basketball. Academics gets first choice because it is their building. A little history lesson may help here. The Longhorns and Aggies built facilities with taxpayer money. After that, the laws were changed so that no other schools could do the same. To get around it, we built a "coliseum" and rent it to the athletic department at times for basketball. It was built with taxpayer money, so it cannot just be transferred to athletics. Ever wonder why the roof was brown for so long and didn't display any logo or name? It is silver now and would be a perfect place for LED North Texas that could be seen for miles. Wonder why athletics has not done that? Nothing is done to that place for the benefit of athletics. It is a tired argument because nothing has changed since we built it 50 years ago.

Nope. It is officially an academic building. Build a new arena and I'll be in favor of naming it. As long as athletics pays rent, no thanks.

White jerseys, white pants, white socks, white mouthpiece, white shoes. White out game. Will be one of two games we wear white at home. The other game will be when we wear the throwback apple green helmets from the 70's, possibly on homecoming.

Call Carl Evans in the Athletic Department. If he isn't the guy, he will know who is and be glad to help.

Peterbilt Motors

If SMU wants to join the "new" PAC 12, I'll hold the door for them. They will be like Colorado in ten years asking to come back.

Scheduling is a lot harder than most people think. Some people won't play you and many times you just don't have a fit with each other. I am always in favor of scheduling a home game we should win and I don't want to play P5 unless they agree to come to Denton (preferably first).

That kind of implosion is what it will take to change the current NIL model.

I would like for this to be true. I would take 7-5. I fear more likely 5-7 or 4-8.

This would help as much as retention of players on the roster. Excellent point.

And how many would have stayed if Littrell would have stayed? There is no way to know, but he did get players to stay previously because he had a good relationship with them. Coach Morris has no relationship with them. And some transferred after Spring ball. Isn't that Morris' fault for not retaining them? Littrell clearly went a different route his last year in recruiting. No way to know if it would have worked out long term, but we did play for the conference championship last year.

They are critical. I killed us in Fouts when a kid would go to see a school with turf and come to NT and see dormant grass in the winter. It kills us in basketball when they come see the Pit and there isn't a basketball floor down. It killed us when we didn't have an indoor practice facility and the high school he was coming from did. It is absolutely critical.

Of all the conferences that I thought would fold, the PAC was nearly last on the list. Couldn't even imagine this when I was a kid.

Defense Defense Defense. If we will just tackle better, we will be fine.

Beat a top 25 team for only the second time in school history to qualify for a bowl. We have to quit discounting ourselves. Would have been just as good without the first sentence.

Not once did he line up as a TE. Seems strong with some acceleration.

I think the $25 might have been new members in the MGSF. That would increase our total number of donors and be a starting point for engagement with the end result being additional season tickets.

I think Christian is going to be pretty good for us. Why isn't anyone thinking he will be a starter? He already knows the system. He played well when he got minutes. What am I missing?

At least this guy knows something about us. I would say this prediction is accurate. Year one maybe this is okay. Going forward, not so much.

Offense was not our problem the last two years. We rarely kept anyone from scoring at will. We could not tackle and had to move a LB to S just to get someone in the secondary to make contact. Also, we ran an odd man front the last two years. It would be nice if these people actually did a little research before writing about us. Just once, do the minimum amount of actual research.

And I am really at a loss as to what the solution is. I regularly invite guests, many of whom are alumni. All enjoy and want to come again. None have bought their own tickets. They just want to be invited again. They buy NT gear and follow the team, but they don't come on their own.