LaTech AD scheduled too ambitiously?

UNTFan23 · May 26, 2015

Colorado was also pretty good back then--they didn't need tro consider a series with UNT that was outside of a whore game in Boulder. Now that they are absolutely terrible, with no more game at all in Texas, where they were knonw to get recruits back in those days that got them division and conference championships in the old Big XII, I'd suspect that they could be sold on the merit of playing here. Of course, SMU and UH probably have more appeal to them, but you watch and see them schedule a series with UTSA--then watch as we ask ourselves (again) why UTSA can schedule these teams and we cannot. Obviously, San Antonio is a major tourist destination adn the Alamodome holds a lot of people, as compared to Denton and Apogee. but I still think its at least worth the call. If they say no, tell the media and fans exactly what they said as to why they wouldn't come play here. That alone would go a long way into making alot of us feel like we are actually trying to get a series against a P5 team that DFW fans would be interested in going out to Apogee and watching with their UNT neighbors and friends. It certainly would be easier to get people there than scheduling Northern Colorado, an FCS team that I'm certain will end up in Denton in the years to come.

I believe the majority of OOC games UTSA is scheduling are 2-for-1 deals.

If North Texas fans are willing to accept these kinds of games and a new AD is willing to go out there and find those kinds of contracts, we too could possibly have more P5 teams come to Denton. RV has said he really only wants a single one-and-done game per season and then home-and-home games with anyone that is open to playing us and an FCS school for an easy win.

Depending on how you want to look at things, the multi-game contracts with Army and SMU either help or hurt us with future scheduling. We have maybe one open OOC slot in either 2018 or 2019 and it opens up after 2020.

Ben Gooding · May 26, 2015

Because 2-0's @ Iowa are better than 2-1's?

I'm happy with the Army/SMU series. I am not happy about being thrown to the wolves every. single. year. And this year twice.

Edited May 26, 2015 by Ben Gooding

MeanGreenTexan · May 26, 2015

Because 2-0's @ Iowa are better than 2-1's?
I'm happy with the Army/SMU series. I am not happy about being thrown to the wolves every. single. year. And this year twice.

100% yes.

We're being paid TWICE for that "2-0", whereas a "2-1" nets you 2 trips for $0 and whatever you get at the gate for your 1 game, which even in a sold-out Apogee is not going to be as much as 1 road paycheck game... let alone 2. Then, it ties up your scheduling in the future.

Just say no to 2-for-1's... Unless it's Texas, A&M, or Oklahoma, but those will never ever happen.

UNTFan23 · May 26, 2015

Because 2-0's @ Iowa are better than 2-1's?
I'm happy with the Army/SMU series. I am not happy about being thrown to the wolves every. single. year. And this year twice.

I think it was pointed out by someone that the Iowa series originally started out as a one-and-done and then a second game was added after-the-fact. I'm not thrilled about two away games with them either.

The best way to get rid of the money games is to start doing a better job of filling Apogee every single game regardless of who the opponent is. That gives the athletic department consistent revenue to start looking for better opponents because we can start guaranteeing a decent payout for a visiting team.

Ben Gooding · May 26, 2015

I'd prefer 2-1 over 2-0. I'm not in the business of watching our team get pistol whipped up and down the field for the sake of the almighty dollar. I'm not advocating we live on 2-1's, but what I am saying is we need to get quality opponents into Apogee even if that means taking on a 2-1 on the rare occasion. Signing up for 2-0's or signing up to play 2 road P5 games in the same season is program suicide. It's pointless and accomplishes nothing.

Ben Gooding · May 26, 2015

I think it was pointed out by someone that the Iowa series originally started out as a one-and-done and then a second game was added after-the-fact. I'm not thrilled about two away games with them either.

The best way to get rid of the money games is to start doing a better job of filling Apogee every single game regardless of who the opponent is. That gives the athletic department consistent revenue to start looking for better opponents because we can start guaranteeing a decent payout for a visiting team.

The only pay out UNT is going to ever do is to FCS. We will not pay out to G5's or P5's for a 1-1. A pay out won't happen for a 2-1. We do though have to start doing a much better job of filling the stadium. That is our saving grace to get us away from annual P5 road games.

untjim1995 · May 26, 2015

The only pay out UNT is going to ever do is to FCS. We will not pay out to G5's or P5's for a 1-1. A pay out won't happen for a 2-1. We do though have to start doing a much better job of filling the stadium. That is our saving grace to get us away from annual P5 road games.

We won't ever get away from at least one money game against the P5s because it is easy money. You can schedule one game in a season at a P5 juggernaut and get non-revenue sports paid for the entire year with it. And its what almost every G5 program in America does, not just us.

I think a 2 for 1 with a traditional power would be worth it, even if we played at the Cotton Bowl for our one, but I know I am in the minority here. But a game in Dallas at the Cotton Bowl against Nebraska or LSU would be possible since it would hold the fans that follow those two powers. And if you somehow win that one game, you have given your program the chance to catapult itself to a place its rarely (or never) been.

The Iowa games, when looked at as a money game, is just genius. We play a B1G team, get a huge check, and have to potential to actually compete. I've seen Troy, Arkansas State, MUTS, and FAU compete and defeat a B1G team from time to time in early season OOC play. So, getting those two games is great on that side of the equation. Plus, you don't play name-your-SEC-or-Big XII-powerhouse that has athletes that we cannot compete with ever, leading to severe blowouts almost always. The only problems I have with the two games at Iowa are 1.) that it shouldn't get matched up with another bodybag game in the same season anymore, yet we play at Tennessee, and 2.) we were explicitly told when Apogee was trying to get funded was we would be ablet o upgrade our OOC schedule to bring in more well-known opponets, teams like Iowa...

At this point, though, we cannot even consider getting another OOC team to play in Denton until 2020 and beyond unless SMU or Army drops the series with us. With P5 leagues mandating more OOC games against P5 competition and not playing G5s on the road, I don't see a team like Iowa coming here. If I were the AD here, looking at what I have in play now with the schedule, I would look at scheduling only G5 schools for OOC play and try to regionalize it for exposure. In other words, with Army, we play in the NE every two years, while SMU gives a local game every year. I'd schedule a western opponent for a 4 game series, like Fresno State or BYU, then I'd schedule a game in the upper MIdwest, like NIU or Ohio again. Since we play in a southern based league, we wouldn't need any additional SE or Texas exposure with G5 teams, but we would get games across the country each year and have those teams come here to play, as well. And for those that claim we have to have a bodybag game to pay the bills still, then either raise the student fee to a level that powerhouses like UTSA and Texas State charge their students to cover this shortfall or throw this all out and play two bodybags every year like we are this year--if that's the only way we can pay for the AD to run, we need to just ULM or La Tech it and play two bodybag games every year, which is absurdly pathetic for a university of our size in the state of Texas.

Cerebus · May 26, 2015

The only pay out UNT is going to ever do is to FCS. We will not pay out to G5's or P5's for a 1-1. A pay out won't happen for a 2-1.

We paid Idaho $410,000 for a one and done.

VideoEagle · May 26, 2015

We paid Idaho $410,000 for a one and done.

Damn it, there you go with facts again.

UTSA Fan · May 26, 2015

100% yes.
We're being paid TWICE for that "2-0", whereas a "2-1" nets you 2 trips for $0 and whatever you get at the gate for your 1 game, which even in a sold-out Apogee is not going to be as much as 1 road paycheck game... let alone 2. Then, it ties up your scheduling in the future.
Just say no to 2-for-1's... Unless it's Texas, A&M, or Oklahoma, but those will never ever happen.

But isn't short term money only part of the equation? Doesn't it add recruiting and season ticket value to run Arizona, O.S.U. and other P.5. Teams through the gate? I can almost guarantee you based on comments by prospects who signed and season ticket holders that those games are, seemingly from the outside, long term investments that pay huge program dividends?

greenit · May 27, 2015

But isn't short term money only part of the equation? Doesn't it add recruiting and season ticket value to run Arizona, O.S.U. and other P.5. Teams through the gate? I can almost guarantee you based on comments by prospects who signed and season ticket holders that those games are, seemingly from the outside, long term investments that pay huge program dividends?

The novelty of watching your team get beat by teams that have a huge advantage over you eventually wears off. Fans not only want to see you play a recognized name, but they want to see you beat those teams. Eventually you are better off not frequently playing the big boys and instead playing slightly lesser known names and beating them. People want to be associated with a winner.

Otherwise they become cynical and spend their time on message boards pointing out everything that is wrong in the world.

UTSA Fan · May 27, 2015

I do believe it is about winning. I can see your point about annual curb stompings. Thanks for the perspective.

Mean Green Matt · May 27, 2015

How much is Iowa paying us?

Harry · May 27, 2015

How much is Iowa paying us?

Iowa is paying North Texas $900,000 to compete in a 2015 football game at Kinnick Stadium, according to the game contract.

Read more: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/sports/college/2014/06/04/iowa-hawkeyes-north-texas-dan-mccarney-texas-longhorns-ncaa-football/9969567/

KRAM1 · May 27, 2015

The novelty of watching your team get beat by teams that have a huge advantage over you eventually wears off. Fans not only want to see you play a recognized name, but they want to see you beat those teams. Eventually you are better off not frequently playing the big boys and instead playing slightly lesser known names and beating them. People want to be associated with a winner.Otherwise they become cynical and spend their time on message boards pointing out everything that is wrong in the world.

Yep.....best answer right here!

Ben Gooding · May 27, 2015

We paid Idaho $410,000 for a one and done.

Yeah, let's bring up the rare exceptions.

BillySee58 · May 27, 2015

Yeah, let's bring up the rare exceptions.

When you use the word "ever," there doesn't have to be a trend. Just an example. Edited May 27, 2015 by BillySee58

emmitt01 · May 27, 2015

Iowa is paying North Texas $900,000 to show up for a 2015 football game at Kinnick Stadium, according to the game contract.
Read more: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/sports/college/2014/06/04/iowa-hawkeyes-north-texas-dan-mccarney-texas-longhorns-ncaa-football/9969567/

FIFY

MeanGreenTexan · May 27, 2015

But isn't short term money only part of the equation? Doesn't it add recruiting and season ticket value to run Arizona, O.S.U. and other P.5. Teams through the gate? I can almost guarantee you based on comments by prospects who signed and season ticket holders that those games are, seemingly from the outside, long term investments that pay huge program dividends?

If you're talking about a 1-1, then absolutely.

If you're talking about 2-1's, then all you're doing is digging yourself a hole where the only way out is to schedule a 5-game home schedule at some point.

emmitt01 · May 27, 2015

If you're talking about a 1-1, then absolutely.
If you're talking about 2-1's, then all you're doing is digging yourself a hole where the only way out is to schedule a 5-game home schedule at some point.

Agree.

5 game home schedules are just unacceptable around here.

oldguystudent · May 27, 2015

5 game home schedules are just unacceptable around here.

Make it a 12 game home schedule. If they're all gonna be on Tuesday night, it's irrelevant.

GMG24 · May 27, 2015

Agree.
5 game home schedules are just unacceptable around here.

Coach Mac, said at the Caravan last night that as long as he and RV are at NT there will never be a 5 home game season again. Take that for what its worth.

BillySee58 · May 27, 2015

If you're talking about a 1-1, then absolutely.
If you're talking about 2-1's, then all you're doing is digging yourself a hole where the only way out is to schedule a 5-game home schedule at some point.

Not necessarily. Our series with Army ends in 2021. If we scheduled a 2-for-1 from 2022 through 2024 we wouldn't have to have any 5-home-game schedules.

Assuming we continue to follow the model of getting paid to play one body-bag game and paying to bring in one FCS school, here's how the schedule would look:

2022:

- Away at P5 body bag

- Home against FCS

- Home against SMU

- Away at P5 2-for-1

- 4 conference home and 4 conference away games

2023:

- Away at P5 body bag

- Home against FCS

- Away at SMU

- Home against P5 2-for-1

- 4 conference home games and 4 conference away games

2024:

- Away at P5 body bag

- Home against FCS

- Home against SMU

- Away against P5 2-for-1

- 4 conference home and 4 conference away games

Then you make sure you start off at home in the home-and-home series you start in 2025 and you would have all 6-game home schedules.

Cerebus · May 27, 2015

When you use the word "ever," there doesn't have to be a trend. Just an example.

I'm about to the point where I am going to stop correcting him. First, he never seems to learn. Two, he only has one response when he becomes confused: