MGB: UNT's future nonconference opponents

Greendylan · February 11, 2015

You guys do realize that Iowa has lost to G5 teams in recent years, right? No one loves the paycheck games, but if you have to play one each year, Iowa's a good fit. They're a respected program with name recognition, but in most seasons they aren't going around clobbering everyone 70-0 or something.

UNT90 · February 11, 2015

Nothing demonstrates this point better than this board after the win over Nicholls State. Dajon exploded and just about everyone's spirits were sky high. There were a few people who were saying to hold off on the optimism, but for the most part, everyone was on cloud 9 and talking rebound after the more-telling LATech loss.
Bring in the FCS opponents and whip them. Make the fans happy and pile up the wins. No problem here.

Nothing like worshiping false idols, eh?

Some warned while the game was in progress that it was a mirage.

And what happened from that point forward? Crushing let down after crushing let down.

If you are saying these games are worth it to get the same 30 people excited for a very short period of time, well, ok?

Edited February 11, 2015 by UNT90

MeanGreenTexan · February 11, 2015

Nothing like worshiping false idols, eh?
Some warned while the game was in progress that it was a mirage.
And what happened from that point forward? Crushing let down after crushing let down.
If you are saying these games are worth it to get the same 30 people excited for a very short period of time, well, ok?

Oh, count me as one of these...

But it's not just the same 30 people. It's anyone who wants to see UNT win. It's not the optimal scenario, but it's where we are. SEC schools are punishing FCS schools too. It's nothing new, and it's not anything we should avoid either.

UNT90 · February 11, 2015

Oh, count me as one of these...
But it's not just the same 30 people. It's anyone who wants to see UNT win. It's not the optimal scenario, but it's where we are. SEC schools are punishing FCS schools too. It's nothing new, and it's not anything we should avoid either.

Except the FBS's have far more meaningful conference home games than us, not to mention 2 or 3 more home games a year. Edited February 11, 2015 by UNT90

MeanGreenTexan · February 11, 2015

Except the FBS's have far more meaningful conference home games than us, not to mention 2 or 3 more home games a year.

Those schools have the money to have 7-8 home games schedules. UNT doesn't have the financial backing to accomplish this.

foutsrouts · February 11, 2015

Soooo tired of this scheduling. 0 winnable p5 games. 0 p5 home games. Body bag games, spares at home, 1 spare that might beat us in Liberty and SMU & Army. Woohoo. I'm done with season tix for 6 years.

Call me a dreamer, but If Mac could just find a way to get our QB situation (and play calling) straightened out, I'm not going to say that games against teams like Iowa are totally unwinnable. Tough challenge alright, but far from impossible. Of course we need to get our defense back somewhere close to the '13 level, and that looks like a tough task unless our JC guys REALLY come through. I do agree that it will not happen with a QB who has very little if any big play potential against quality teams.

UNT90 · February 11, 2015

Those schools have the money to have 7-8 home games schedules. UNT doesn't have the financial backing to accomplish this.

Right, so don't compare what we do with scheduling to what they do with scheduling.

untbowler · February 11, 2015

Call me a dreamer, but If Mac could just find a way to get our QB situation (and play calling) straightened out, I'm not going to say that games against teams like Iowa are totally unwinnable. Tough challenge alright, but far from impossible. Of course we need to get our defense back somewhere close to the '13 level, and that looks like a tough task unless our JC guys REALLY come through. I do agree that it will not happen with a QB who has very little if any big play potential against quality teams.

DMac's playcalling and style do not lend itself to winning these types of games when the opponent has better athletes, grinding style keeps it close but that is it.

UNT90 · February 11, 2015

DMac's playcalling and style do not lend itself to winning these types of games when the opponent has better athletes, grinding style keeps it close but that is it.

If by close you mean 34-3 instead of 66-3, then I agree.

FirefightnRick · February 11, 2015

MGB: A few thoughts

http://meangreenblog.dentonrc.com/2015/02/thoughts-on-unts-future-nonconference-schedule.html/

No Brett, there is not a lot to like. Donors were sold that a new stadium would improve scheduling. It hasn't.

Bringing in 1 P5 in 10 years because your entire goal is to win 6 games is a terrible business model.

No wonder we have so few season ticket holders.

Rick

Edited February 11, 2015 by FirefightnRick

UNTLifer · February 11, 2015

So, some people want wins, some people want to come to watch the opponent. Either way, the same three posters beat us over the head with their agendas.

The SMU and Army series point out how it is a no-win situation. Everyone clamored for the series with SMU. Got it done and now everyone bitches. Everyone said, "Bring is a service academy." Done and now people complain. These are the types of teams that we need to have long term series with, especially SMU since they are a fellow FBS in our backyard.

I agree with those that say one of two things. Cerebus stating to build it like Boise State is a great model. Winning breads excitement which attracts better recruits. I also agree with those that like the SMU/Army series and would like to see us have a home game with an FCS and a beatable FBS team. It is not the same old/same old. That isn't acceptable. The body bag road beat downs are just a means to pay the bills. Adjust your scheduling model, have winnable home games, watch attendance grow, hit these people up to fund the MGC and buy season tickets, watch the team improve and then bring in the bigger schools. Boise became a success with this model as did Kansas State. We can do it also, but it doesn't happen overnight.

casual fan · February 11, 2015

Some random thoughts after reading most of the posts.

1 Having only five home games sucks.

2 Having Army and smu on the schedule for the next several years is exactly perfect.

3 The body bag game each year is a bit more of an opportunity game than in the past...not LSU, Alabama, etc.

4 Having one home game with the sisters of the poor is how most teams build records.

5 After this year I kind of like the schedule.

Cerebus · February 11, 2015

Either way, the same three posters beat us over the head with their agendas.

I ~~resent~~ resemble that remark.

Ben Gooding · February 11, 2015

Florida, Arkansas and Neyland Stadium are far from being considered an opportunity game. Arkansas a couple years ago, yes. Up and coming Arkansas, not a chance. Remember, the same UT team that beat up on us was man handled in a national spotlight bowl game by Arkansas. Playing in The Swamp and Neyland go without saying.

I like the SMU and Army series. They are fantastic to have on the schedule. Anyone that says otherwise is just being a pessimist. Those are 2 quality opponents that we get to host every other year (surprisingly rotating years at that). I like the FCS games. We need boosts in the W column and in confidence. Those games offer that. I am still not a fan of the every year "opportunity game." Find better, creative ways to manage the budget and move to having those every other year if at all possible.

I still believe RV needs to go, regardless of if our OOC scheduke is 4 at home P5 games. His hires lose. Over 100 games below .500 is all I need to hear to understand that his time here has elapsed. It's time to take this train a different direction and I just don't think he's the man to do it. GMG

foutsrouts · February 11, 2015

Some random thoughts after reading most of the posts.

1 Having only five home games sucks.

2 Having Army and smu on the schedule for the next several years is exactly perfect.

3 The body bag game each year is a bit more of an opportunity game than in the past...not LSU, Alabama, etc.

4 Having one home game with the sisters of the poor is how most teams build records.

5 After this year I kind of like the schedule.

I agree with all 5 points, with the possible exception of the quality/names of our scheduled "sisters of the poor" opponents. An area team like SFA might be dangerous some years, but bring 'em in anyway. Same goes for some of our former regional SBC conference mates. Incarnate Word just doesn't do it for me.

NT93 · February 11, 2015

Nothing wrong with Army and SMU. Two teams who are pretty equal to us.

I don't like the Lamar, Incarnate World, ACU, etc. I'm all for a winnable game, but can't we make it a little better opponent. I'm for wins, but how much fun is it to go to the stadium to see 77-7? It's nothing more than a glorified practice.

I think Arkansas, Tennessee, Iowa are they type of teams we need to be playing. Having said that, I think we may be catching both Tennessee and Arkansas at a bad time. I see both of those teams being pretty good for the next few years.

UNTLifer · February 11, 2015

I agree with NT93 except for the Arkansas and Tennessee comment. They will improve and stay there. They are not programs that will be kept down.

In place of ACU, Incarnate Word and Lamar, let's schedule the likes of Texas State, SFA, Sam Houston, etc... and P5's like Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, Duke, Kentucky, ect...

Edited February 11, 2015 by UNTLifer

Eagle1855 · February 11, 2015

I think Arkansas, Tennessee, Iowa are they type of teams we need to be playing. Having said that, I think we may be catching both Tennessee and Arkansas at a bad time. I see both of those teams being pretty good for the next few years.

That's what we do. Want to win a national title? Schedule UNT. For a while, seemed like all we did was play teams that had just won or were about to win a championship. In light of that, I feel we should be getting paid more for the magic our mere presence on the schedule brings to the table.

Greendylan · February 11, 2015

Also, we do realize that not every FCS team is as epically bad as Nicholls State in 2014, right? Lamar and Incarnate Word also easily beat them.

foutsrouts · February 11, 2015

Nothing wrong with Army and SMU. Two teams who are pretty equal to us.

I don't like the Lamar, Incarnate World, ACU, etc. I'm all for a winnable game, but can't we make it a little better opponent. I'm for wins, but how much fun is it to go to the stadium to see 77-7? It's nothing more than a glorified practice.

I think Arkansas, Tennessee, Iowa are they type of teams we need to be playing. Having said that, I think we may be catching both Tennessee and Arkansas at a bad time. I see both of those teams being pretty good for the next few years.

I don't know how Arkansas is going to look when we play them, but Tennessee is returning 19 starters and has the third or fourth ranked recruiting class this year. Probably bad timing on that one, especially if they have a few impact freshmen. Luckily Iowa doesn't look overly loaded.

Harry · February 11, 2015

I don't know how Arkansas is going to look when we play them, but Tennessee is returning 19 starters and has the third or fourth ranked recruiting class this year. Probably bad timing on that one, especially if they have a few impact freshmen. Luckily Iowa doesn't look overly loaded.

Arkansas just signed their head coach to a long extension and had a top recruiting class as well. Other than Vandy and Kentucky there is really not a team in the SEC that you typically want to face in my mind.

FirefightnRick · February 11, 2015

Nothing wrong with Army and SMU. Two teams who are pretty equal to us.

I don't like the Lamar, Incarnate World, ACU, etc. I'm all for a winnable game, but can't we make it a little better opponent. I'm for wins, but how much fun is it to go to the stadium to see 77-7? It's nothing more than a glorified practice.

I think Arkansas, Tennessee, Iowa are they type of teams we need to be playing. Having said that, I think we may be catching both Tennessee and Arkansas at a bad time. I see both of those teams being pretty good for the next few years.

No, nothing wrong with them every now and then. 6 years straight? Not so much. And it's not the opponent, it's the patterned lack of effort it shows by our AD dept.

North Texas to Army and SMU: "Whatcha got the next 6 years?"

Army and SMU: "we're open, what years are you interested in?"

North Texas: "All of them, we'll take all of them then my work here is done, Woo Hoo!"

Rick

UNT90 · February 11, 2015

No Brett, there is not a lot to like. Donors were sold that a new stadium would improve scheduling. It hasn't.
Bringing in 1 P5 in 10 years because your entire goal is to win 6 games is a terrible business model.
No wonder we have so few season ticket holders.
Rick

We strive to be a average! -

UNT Athletics

UNT90 · February 11, 2015

So, some people want wins, some people want to come to watch the opponent. Either way, the same three posters beat us over the head with their agendas.
The SMU and Army series point out how it is a no-win situation. Everyone clamored for the series with SMU. Got it done and now everyone bitches. Everyone said, "Bring is a service academy." Done and now people complain. These are the types of teams that we need to have long term series with, especially SMU since they are a fellow FBS in our backyard.
I agree with those that say one of two things. Cerebus stating to build it like Boise State is a great model. Winning breads excitement which attracts better recruits. I also agree with those that like the SMU/Army series and would like to see us have a home game with an FCS and a beatable FBS team. It is not the same old/same old. That isn't acceptable. The body bag road beat downs are just a means to pay the bills. Adjust your scheduling model, have winnable home games, watch attendance grow, hit these people up to fund the MGC and buy season tickets, watch the team improve and then bring in the bigger schools. Boise became a success with this model as did Kansas State. We can do it also, but it doesn't happen overnight.

It wasn't "everyone," and "everyone" also didn't ask for a 20 year series with both teams. Some warned that SMU wouldn't really be that productive and wouldn't lead to a sell out.

We aren't using the Boise St model because we still play a whore game every year, but keep on

agendizing by claiming agendas.

MeanGreenTexan · February 11, 2015

It wasn't "everyone," and "everyone" also didn't ask for a 20 year series with both teams. Some warned that SMU wouldn't really be that productive and wouldn't lead to a sell out.
We aren't using the Boise St model because we still play a whore game every year, but keep on
agendizing by claiming agendas.

That's not even a real word homie.