stebo

"Travel" is measured in terms of cost, not miles. While Florida is a long ways from Texas - it costs about $200 round trip to fly to Miami. Try pricing a ticket to Moscow or Boise, ID... you will pay 4 times that. Same goes for Reno, Logan, San Jose, Fresno, Hawaii and pretty much every single WAC program/city. The only affordable trips would be Las Cruces (flights to El Paso are about the same cost as to Florida) and Ruston - which is basically the same distance as Monroe. You guys think of travel in terms of miles but travel is measured in terms of dollars and "cost"... The Belt is pretty compact for travel in football. In basketball, the divisions make it very affordable. Is the Belt the bottom rung? Pretty close... but it is definitely less expensive then the WAC in terms of travel. I am not going to argue about it but when ignorance rears its ugly head then I will correct inaccuracies.

Wow, I don't think that I have ever got to do this...

Hey guys, I am going to Austin with my buddy today/tonight, we are ready to blast off. Does anyone know if this game will be on Sirius? I know that Sirius picks up just about all of the Belt football games but I didn't know if they picked up the basketball games... if not are there any flagships stations that would be carrying the game during the drive down?

One door closes and another opens. If the person that I want gets the job then we will all be very happy. I know that this person has already applied for the position and has many of the similar qualities that Jennings had... I can't say more but when I read the blog about Jennings I was bittersweet... now I have hope for my first choice, hopefully it comes to fruition. I know that he wants to be at NT and we don't have to worry about him flirting with the department and then leaving - he really wants the job. Fingers crossed!

So was Coach Jennings at NT when Dodge was our OC?

SMU thinks that they can throw money at the problem. It doesn't always work. Bad attendance? How about a state of the art on campus stadium? Errrrr - BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Didn't work. Ok, how about hiring an up and comer like Phil Bennet - at the time the hotest asst around? Buzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Didn't work. SMU was a couple of plays away from a great season under Phil. June Jones will not have the same type of allure in Dallas that he had on the isalnds. He took a Superbowl San Diego team and managed to turn them into mediocre. Look at their schedule from last year? Easy, Easy, Easy... in fact, they have had easy schedules for the last few years now. Their biggest competition has been from powerhouse teams like Fresno and Boise... And those teams are not exactly world beaters. All the really had to do was beat an entire schedule of sub 500 teams. I think that they beat one team with a winning record in Boise... maybe two, not sure. As for Jones moving on up? Well, I don't see who will pay him $2 million anywhere else. There are auto-bid schools that don't even pay that much. SMU is pulling a classic SMU move and trying to throw money at the problem. Jones is smart, his star QB is graduating and there is nobody really there to replace him. He listed off a bunch of reasons about facilities and commitment as for the reasons that he was leaving Hawaii - they addressed them all and he ran for the money. They even offered to raise the money and match it from what I understand but it was too little too late. What most on here (and around the country) doesn't realize is that Hawaii is like UTEP - they are both very easy to turn around because there are no admission requirements. PB addressed a little of this while he was at SMU and got them to lighten up a little on that but SMU still makes all football players go through an interview process with the entrance committee and Jones will not be able to round up all of the local thugs the way that he did on the islands. Aloha Jones! Which means welcome in Hawaii! It also means goodbye, so Aloha SMU Boosters - you just wasted your money in my opinion. You can Aloha that big donation goodbye. Bad choice in my opinion. I know I am in the minority... but Jones was like a GOD in Hawaii, the newspaper was not kidding when they said that he could probably run for an win the Governor's Office. He has just made a huge mistake in my opinion. SMU does not have more potential then Hawaii - Hawaii was a cush job for Jones that was willing to match the offer. He just couldn't stand the AD. Well, he should have just told them to fire the AD... hell, he could have told him to make him the AD - they would have done anything to keep him. At SMU he is going to figure really quick that people do not give a damn about their program. There are a handfull of very rich alumni that care - but they can only fill about 100 seats in Ford. Ford will remain empty, Jones will win the close games that PB struggled with - and SMU will probably be in the NO Bowl within a year or two... but I don't see him ever being more then a 7 or 8 win coach there. I just don't see it.

I took driver's ed at NT (both in HS for my license and as a college student as a teacher)... and Ken Bahnsen (sp?) was in charge of the class/company/program. I seem to recall him saying that he was either the AD or Asst AD during the teaching part... Wasn't Fry both AD and Coach? And wasn't it normal back in the early days to have this arrangement? To have the AD and Football coach be the same person? Just curious... and does anyone know if Coach Bahnsen (I THINK that was his name, it was back in 1996) was ever the AD? Also, weren't the AD's and the track dept in bed for awhile so to speak? Maybe even more then the football dept?

Ramone, Would you ever consider coming back to North Texas as a coach? It sounds like you have a very solid relationship with DeLoach and with most of the championship players graduated - it would be nice to have someone in the locker room talk about how the Green Curtain was such a dominating force back in the 2002 run. Sometimes inspirational stories do just that - inspire players to play above their natural ability. I really appreciate how you have become involved as a fan... I think that you would be an asset to the coaching staff. Just my $.02. Steve Boedeker Fan of the Mean Green since 1993, Even Bigger Fan of Ramone Archie since he started sharing his thoughts on GoMeanGreen.com

Maybe they renamed it because this is the same formula that Cuban described for his league, i dunno - exactly the same thing.

The Belt also finished higher then the MAC in the Sag's (final Sags came out today). First time since 2004 that the Belt has finished higher then another conference. While I am happy for Tulsa for winning their game... if they had lost, we would have finihsed ahead of both the MAC and CUSA. *Shrugs* - also, if Troy had gotten into another bowl and won - we probably would have finished ahead of the MAC and CUSA (yep, it was that close). MAC went "0" fer in their 3 bowl games. CUSA went 2-4. Wins against WAC and MAC. I really think that the Belt will replace the MAC in the GMAC Bowl. We will get another bowl - three bowl eligible teams, one of them really good, and only one team gets to play. For those that think the Belt schedule brings down our "ranking potential" just take a look at CUSA champ UCF... they finished with 10 wins and ended up being ranked 46. Troy finished in second place, with no bowl game - and was ranked higher then every team in CUSA except UCF and was barely behind them at 53. The MAC's champ/highest rated team was 83 (Central Michigan) and finished behind both FAU and Troy. If we had been able to count Western Kentucky this year - we probably would have passed them both by as well (rather then just the one)... Anyways, I know how these threads go... I post this, someone like NT80 posts that the Belt still sicks... I write a 4 paragraph list of examples as to why the Belt might still be bad and that "Yes, I agree - we are near the bottom".... the point was that we did improve as a group again this year - this time in the rankings... and then they tell me what an idiot that I am. Oh well, the Belt is making progess and is better then it was before. The Belt is our home right now and until that changes we should be proud of our progress. That's all, nothing more.

I don't know why anyone posted in this forum in the first place. I did make the initial post - and made a little joke in it - but the link led EVERYONE to the non-UNT sports thread. When it got hijacked - I again pointed everyone back to the non-UNT sports thread. I will keep my opinion of those posters to myself because I respect the moderators of this board. I just want to invite those healthy debates to continue - but in the correct forum - it would be a shame for the conversations to just "stop". There are some very intelligent people on this board and a vast difference of opinions to go along with them. I like the debate about politics, it is healthy for the board and for the country to have a conversation about our country's future. But I have to say it one more time, the non-UNT Sports forum is where I politely asked everyone to post their opinions and it would have been really nice to just have people follow the link instead of trying to draw "more" attention to their point of view. So, please continue to debate - but in the correct forum. Maybe there are some swing voters that need someone to help them make their mind up.

Yeah, no doubt. Why can't someone run on this platform... oh yeah, he did - his name is Ron Pual.

I just got way too excited, lol. Sorry - "forte"

Umm, well - he would be the absolute perfect fit. In fact, maybe they will make him the Assistant Head Coach along with Dodge. We got killed in special teams and that is his fortay. We need a D-Coordinator.... he is absolutely the PERFECT fit for our needs if this turns out to be true. OMG - I have never doubted Dodge or RV; but this would be an INCREDIBLE hire. INCREDIBLE. Maybe they will just take Butch's pay and combine it with Mendoza's pay and give it all to this guy so that we can give him a respectable salary. Please let it be true! PLEASE! Dodge has serious UT ties... this makes sense.

I was married to a doctor for 8 years so I know the arguement on the side of the doctors. The reason that hospital costs are so high is that the hospital automatically charges those WITH health care to make up for those without. A simple answer for the problem would be to have a happy medium. Let the government expand Medicare to include non-insured citizens. Have the government put caps on hospitals for what they can charge on everything. An aspirin in the hospital should be no more then it is at a convenience store. If the homeless guy can't pay for it than the government can absorb those costs into the current Medicare system. If they were to get costs down, they would probably be able to pay for all of the uninsured people and even save money. There are some people that do not have as choice in an open market. Those people are the mentally handicapped, the elderly with fixed incomes, and children. We currently take care of the first two through Medicare and regardless of what the negative are - the system works. Children need to be added to the list. As a society, an adult should be able to choose whether or not they will pay for health insurance - an 8 year old can't choose and we don't choose our parents. Absorb children into Medicare as well. If you are between the age of 18 and 63 then you should be on your own. Have that jacked up to 25 for a college student all the way through grad school. Again, the only way to do this is to overhaul the billing with universal hospital cost watch. If you do these things - the hospitals will be happy and will lose their silly excuses for overcharging. Insurancee companies will have to compete for lower rates like car insurance companies do... and all kids, handicapped, and elderly will be covered. Finally - our veterans get great care at some facilities and terrible care at others. I believe that if you serve this country, in the military - in any way at all - you should never be without insurance, regardless of age. If you are working then you would probably want to take the company insurance because dealing with the VA would be such a pain in the ass... but if you are unemployed then I think that all veterans should be eligible for the VA care system. And it needs to be consistent. I saw a story about a guy that had his leg blown off in the war. He had a million dollar leg on. You could tell it was a fluff piece. Not all soldiers are this lucky, most are not. In fact - this could be the only guy in the country with a million dollar electronic leg and it was probably all put together so that he could make appearances about his great care that he got from the VA and the government. Well, I think that vets should be given equal care. That is my opinion. If we cannot afford it - then I would say that we should raise taxes for it. The people that serve this country deserve the best. I don't give a damn how much it costs. And they deserve it for the rest of their lives if they are not covered through a traditional method. No other civilized country treats its vets as inconsistent as we do. Notice how I didn't say treat their vets as "bad" as we do - because my grandfather is treated VERY well by his VA hospital in northern CA... but I have read nightmare stories about how bad other VA hospitals are. If they need to cut costs - well, there are a butt load of brand new doctors with student loan debt that would love to "serve" their country without fighting in a war or being shipped off to New Guinea... just set up a program where a doctor can work off his/her student loans after residency or during residency... hell, turn the VA hospitals into teaching hospitals and you would have an influx of $40K a year labor... use those residents and their skills, they are more prepared then older doctors that are not as up to date on the new technology and cannot even run a computer. Use these guys and gals and you got yourself a new system that has been overhauled - without really spending that much money. Of course - this is all too much common sense, it would never be proposed by a politician.

I just read that and all that it says is that she would have a ratings system so that kids couldn't buy porno games. That is nothing more then a rated PG, R, or X movie. Do you think that kids should be able to buy a rated X movie? Why is it ok to buy the equivalent in the form of a game?

I disagree - I think that Obama would cover the young vote and Hillary would mop up the rest of the people that remember how great the Clinton era was. She did get 30% of the vote in Iowa. It is a tight race. The VP is a position that rarely affects the outcome - unless you are Ross Perot. But I think that Hillary would sway the voters that are not keen on Obama. Don't get me wrong - arguing this is kind of like arguing about who would win a football game, it really doesn't matter until they play... I think that putting Hillary and Obama together would be essentially like having USC and Hawaii teaming up to take on LSU. They would be flashy and glitzy - but it would still be a great game. I just think that the gimmick factor alone would get them just enough votes to win (as much as I hate the idea). The best bet for the GOP is to have either one or the other run - together I think that they are pretty unbeatable. They will cover every talk show and MTV special in the country. Take all of that publicity and put it up against who? Huckabee? Romney? Thompson? The only one that would have a chance is Romney as a public speaker... but his religious affiliation is killing him. What about Huckabee? He comes off like a backwards coon. Thompson would be a great Prez, but I don't think that he would do the whole talk show circuit. He just doesn't seem "that into all of this"... Just my 2 cents. Edit to add: Tony, I don't remember ever telling you that I thought Kinky had a chance of winning, lol. I was just cheering for him. I always cheer for the underdog. Kinky was really lucky to even get on the ballot and if he really got 12% then I think that was pretty impressive. Honestly, I didn't pay too much attention to it, I didn't even vote in that election - LOL... You know who I am cheering for - Fred Thompson, I have been very up front about that. Don't make me out to be some Hillary suppporter. I just think that she can spin the whole thing with Bill to make it look like she can "relate" to common people with common problems. We live in a country where more then half of the marriages end in divorce and about 70% involve an affair. SOME people will like that she lived to tell about it, she is a survivor in their eyes... just trying to analyze the race.... I am cheering for Thompson. Who do you like in this one?

Really? You believe that? I think it would be the most lopsided victory the other way... probably the highest margin of victory since Clinton was re-elected. Hillary by herself will lose. Obama by himself would have a chance but the indifference factor would probably kick in too much and the Dems would lose to probably any of the Repub candidates. BUT, together - I think that they would wallop the Grand Ole Party. They are both very good public speakers and they can both raise an assload of money. Who would beat them? Huckabee? Romney? Look at the choices... which brings me back to Thompson... wow, what a great term to run for. Virtually zero competition if he is able to gain some momentum. BUT - I don't think that ANY Republican can beat the two of them combined. People will come out of the woodowrks to make history and elect not only the first Black President but the first Female (somewhat) VP. The gimmick factor alone would kill any chances of the GOP stealing this one back. Maybe it is just election talk, but the two of them have been emphatic that they are not interested in getting the VP ticket with the other. They have campaigned with each other down in New Orleans, so it appears that they are at least "feeling it out" - but their public statements have been the exact opposite.

What do you guys think? Hillary got beat pretty bad. Well, she is looking at 3rd place - but it is really close with Edwards. She def lost to Obama. Are those two kids ever gonna team up and run together? Also - what do you all think about Huckabee beating Romney? I really thought that Romney would take Iowa - but I think that his negative campaign blitz over the last few days just killed his momentum. He spent a TON of money. Is the whole Mormon thing too much for him to get past or do you guys think that it was the negative campsign ads? I swear, the amount of money that he spent - he must have been on the TV set between every other ad for the last two weeks straight. Romney is really the best choice on paper for the Republicans if you don't look at religious affiliation but he tried to go the scare tactic route and it just didn't work - or maybe it was the Mormon thing.... I just can't believe that Obama won by such a large margin. He did not spend that much money, ran a somewhat neutral campaign; and has stayed pretty quiet. From what I understand - Edwards really dumped a lot into Iowa and that probably is what brought him up to 2nd (narrowly edging out Hillary according to CBS)... They are reporting 37% for Obama, 31% for Edwards and 30% for Hillary. Also - I want everyone to take a look at Fred Thompson's numbers - a very solid 3rd place finish with 27% in the Republican race. This guy still hasn't "really" announced... lol... he is quietly getting on ballots and letting the other candidates crash and burn with their spending and negative ads. I really like Thompson, I think that he is probably the best choice out of all of them. Well, I would say that actually Ron Paul would have been the most intelligent candidate but he just has zero chance of winning. Ok, fire away. I think that the Dems have screwed themselves once again. America sent a loud message to Washington two years ago by electing a Dem Congress to change stuff and at least start to edge out of the war... they have done ZERO. In fact, they have increased spending for the war and just funded it through the rest of 2008 - at minimum - we will be funded for a full force war for 12 more months. As long as the money is being used for reconstruction, I am totally fine with it... build schools and electric/water plants and you will win over the people of the Middle East - they only wish for the simple things in life right now. My good friend is a Lt in the Army and is headed back on Jan 20th... he is unhappy but there seems to be a large surge going with him. Everyone that he served with 4 years ago has been called back up and they are all going between the 15th and 20th of this month. I think that we are pushing for more pressure right as the election comes into the news. The Dems think that pushing it forward will get the Republicans bad points for the election - I think it is the exact opposite - I think that America will see through it and blame the Dems for going back on their campaign promises of 2006. That's just my opinion. BTW - did I mention that I LOVE politics? LOL My vote will be for Thompson. If Hillary and Obama wise up and run together, they could win - separate they are screwed and we could very well end up with some idiot like Huckabee.

I am curious, when Dickey demoted/promoted Kenny Evans, he took him out of the position of DC and made him concentrate on a position BUT also promoted him to Assistant Head Coach... is Ronnie boy gonna get the same BS reassignment? I guess that it would be ok as long as it was in name only - but this guys has ZERO respect from his players. The stories that I have heard are pathetic. I really think that a high school coach could do better .... wait, strike that... I mean a COLLEGE coach could do better

Orsini got some waiver so that he could recruit personally. I don't know if that was to hold on to their three or four that they already have or if is was to actively seek out new ones - but he was granted some waiver by the NCAA to recruit for his school while they looked for a new coach.

A playoff system would certainly be great for the auto-bid conferences; but would kill conferences like the Belt and CUSA and MWC. At most, we would each get one team included. As it is, we can negotiate a second or even third bowl. CUSA has 6. MWC has 3 or 4. Even WAC has 2 with a secondary tie in to a 3rd. MAC has quite a few as well. Take away all of that exposure for all of those non-auto-bid conferences and the big guys win again. The only way to have a playoff where we all don't lose out is through the actual BCS formula. Have the 4 (soon to be 5) BCS bowls fight it out - re-poll/re-vote, have a second round, and then a championship game. We would be excluded unless we (the non-auto-bid teams) had a bubble burster... however, the NO Bowl would still take place and would not be devalued as much because we would be in the same boat as everyone else. A playoff is great for college football; but the set-up would kill conferences like MWC, CUSA, WAC, and MAC if done right (or wrong)... I just don't see them ever giving us an equal seat in such a small playing field. The current system works and fans like it... the lowest attended bowl had 25K (NO Bowl) and most had record breaking years. The fledgling Texas Bowl had 60K plus. Fort Worth finally got a good crowd with Cal and Air Force. I just don't see how getting rid of these money making bowl games that are getting a lot of fans out to them would do any good. You can't include them all, or even a third of them - in a true playoff field. This year they would have Georgia moving on to play USC and LSU actually playing Ohio State this week. You hold off on the "Championship game" and then you add two more bowl like the Cotton to make it a total of 6 bowls with the 7th being the Natl Chmp Game... So you take the 6 winners and then you have the 4 winners play each other in the next round of bowls.. go from 12 teams down to 6 after the first round, have the three winners left standing. That is when you re-poll (which will satisfy the pollsters for getting their say in the Natl Championship Teams)... it wouldn't hurt a bubble burster, they would have won two games by this point and proven that an "easy schedule" didn't get them there nor did an easy first round opponent. The team left over could be considered the 3rd place team, which would be nice - to have a true 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place team. It would keep the current system, give a playoff, and make everyone happy in my opinion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-pvPpRKNQ0

Yeah, agree with the boys downstairs... Jesse, you seem like a great guy, we should probably not discuss this kind of stuff on here.

Hey Finch, I got a new phone and don't have your number. E-mail it to me at steve@gomeangreen.com steve