wardly

yes

he was 5 games over 500 in 5 years. if we can't find someone better that is affordable, then we need to drop football and add mens soccer to play in new stadium. by the way, latest sagarin ratings has us 196th out of 245 schools playing division 1a and 1aa ball, just behind prairie view a&m. in fact, we are the lowest rated 1a program listed, with new mexico at 191. who ever we hire is getting a bucket of crapp.

agreed! except for bob tyler in 1982 {2&9], hayen fry was last experienced hc hired, and he was dropped in our lap.in last 20 years, we have hired 2 high school head coaches , neither who had a winning season. between those 2 bad hires we had matt simon, who had 1 winning season and conference title in 4 years, and darrell dickey, who had 3 winning seasons and 4 conference titles in 9 years. since his last winning season [7&5] in 2004, we have won [i think] 11 games in 5&1/2 seasons, and have become the weakest team in the weakest 1a conference. moving into a new stadium, we cannot afford another "grand experiment", and must hire an experienced successful head coach, preferably one who was not fired from his previous job. just an opinion.

i agree with those who want an exprienced head coach, and hope we are past hiring "on the cheap". however, this decision, like all business decisions, boils down to " what do we want, what do we need, and what are we willing and able to pay for." i think most of us can" basically,"[ and i use the term loosely],agree upon questions 1&2. where the rubber meets the road is question #3, which only r.v. knows. i would hope that it is in the $400,000 to $500,000 range, which should give be enought to hire a proven head coach.

i don't know about the ucf job, as their present coach has been there 6 years or so. however, he did turn down the memphis job, hense his pay increase at mtsu. thanks for correcting me regarding his present salary, as i couldn't remember the exact amount. we should be able to get an experienced h.c. for that kind of money.

i think middle tennessee pays its hc $600,000 per year, while we are a little less that $300,000. which is about average in the belt. i would hope that we would double what we are paying td and get an experienced h.c. i just don't think we can afford to hire an up and coming o.c. with the sad state we find our program in.

jerry jones is only one i am aware of that hires his assistants seperately from his head coach. usually a new broom sweeps clean.

at least, maybe longer.

i hope you are right, but we are the worst team in the worst 1a football conference in america.

i have seen our team the last 6 years. hard to get optimistic.

what do we need in a new head coach? just my opinion, but: 1] college head coaching experience.[ lets get real guys,leach is not in the budget. probably $500,000 per year is our max, but just an educated guess] 2] must run a simular offense. t.d. inherited clydesdales from d.d., tried to turn them into quarter horses 3]must have strong texas ties for recruiting purposes.for example, i don't remember the name of sam houston head coach, but he was strongly considered by houston and made their short list of 3 finalist 4] in a perfect world he would have a defense coaching background. 5] he must be able to walk on water, part the seas, and heal our very sick football program which has gone from bad to worst.

if i am not mistaken, we have more seniors on this team than anyone else in the belt. looks to me that our new coach will have to rebuild a team that has won only 6 games in 4 years.

what are you guys smoking? we will open our new stadium next year with another in a long line of sorry teams. unless we win, something we have done only 5 of the last 20 years, the "new" will wear off and we will be back to 18,000 or so attendance, looking to hide 12,000 empty seats. we will need to expand this stadium when pigss fly.

we are in violent agreement. my point is that we have not had a coach with a winning record in 32 years. we have a history of having a sorry football program that is getting worse instead of better. in that context, corky did ok in my book.

he had 5 winning seasons in 9 years. since he was fired, we have had 5 winning seasons in 20 years. he looks pretty good to me, since about 20 of his losses were against the likes of texas tech,a&m, smu, okla.state,baylor,texas,tcu,kentucky,kansas state,oklahoma,new mexico,tulsa,etc. during his tenure we beat new mexico,kansas state,tcu,texas tech,rice,smu, and were robbed in austin in 1988 24-27. only hayden fry had a better modern? day record 1973 to 1978, winning twice as many as he lost.

this is too logical for us to ever do. it just makes too much sense. forget it. what are you thinking?etc,etc,etc

winner is scott franklin. thanks for playing. tickets in tomorrows mail.

golf outing this weekend,so i have 4 seat back tickets on 50 yard line with vip parking available at no charge to first response with mailing address to wardly@tx.rr.com

its always been a problem for us, smu or tcu ,to draw well at home up against texas/ou weekend.while we may not attend cotton bowl classic, some of us have guests that make it difficult to attend. last year our guests went to texas/ ou game, and then we all went to unt evening game. with time change moving classic back, we couldn't make it work this year. just saying.....

well said, i'm sad to say.

great idea!

good teams find a way to win, bad teams find a way to loose. we are a senior loaded bad team who has gotten every bad break one could image this year.having said that, look at the number of personal fouls we had in this game.that,+ six wins in 3&1/2 seasons = poor coaching. as soon as we loose 6 games, i would terminate dodge and find a replacement that we could announce before seasons end. i heard hank talking on radio broadcast about the good players and good teams in the 90's. i must have slept thru that decade. we had 2 winning seasons in that decade, 3 in the following, and only 5 in the past 20 years. we are a sorry football team in a sorry football program in a sorry football conference. its time for a change.[ sorry for the rant, but i am fed up with our state of affairs regarding our football program, or lack there of.]

the wac just doesn't work for us. closest school, other than la tech who has bags packed, is 600 miles from us [nmsu]. our experiebce in the big worst taught us that. also, 6 years ago we didn't have the budget. playing boise, nevada, and hawaii are not the same as competing with them, especially boise. they are the largest state school in the largest city[ which i think is state capitol] in a small state. in a micro way you might compate they to ut. bottom line; we will never have resourses they do. the belt is a much better conference than the new wac, and a better fit for us. just an opinion.

seattle and denver have both tried to get in the wcc, who says they are not expanding after addition of byu. montana, who is experiencing financial problems, is locked at the hip with montana state, and they are not going anywhere. for basketball, it makes sense to add seattle and denver. for football, the have no choice but to add texas state and utsa to get up to 8 schools. does it make them a better conference? no way, but it keeps them alive until realignment strikes again. i give them credit. they are the conference that should be dead but find a way to survive, even if its at a much lower level of competation.

fyi, lane rawlins was at the fau game working the small nt crowd, introducing himself, and thanking those in attendance for coming. i talked to him for about 10 minutes, and was impressed by his interest in our football program. his feeling seemed to be that we need to take care of business in the belt amd that if we do so realignment will take care of itself. not a direct quote, but what i gathered from our conversation.