Southern Miss 2/4/16

Andrew · February 5, 2016

8 hours ago, Censored by Laurie said:

what part of "will not play for Mean Green" was confusing?

Forgive me for using more than 15% of my brain here as others do....Just because it says he won't play for the mean green doesn't mean he never will. Why would he waste his time going to every game and support the team from the back of the bench. Common sense would say that there is atleast a chance he will try out for the team as a walk on next year or try to get a scholarship. Keith Frazier "will not play for the Mean Green" this year but will next year

Edited February 5, 2016 by Andrew

MCMLXXX · February 6, 2016

10 hours ago, Censored by Laurie said:

what part of "will not play for Mean Green" was confusing?

"Will not play" may be viewed as relating to this year or may be viewed as he will never play, depending on the person who reads the statement. It would not be surprising for a young person to change their mind (look at the team picture and see if a particular walk on is missing from the bench). The fact that the person is showing up and sitting near the bench with the team may for some be a clue that he may be considering playing in the future. His future status could be as a walk on. I suppose one can tolerate differing opinions and give the person who expresses them the benefit of the doubt or opt for kneejerk buffoonery.

Edited February 6, 2016 by MCMLXXX

UNT90 · February 6, 2016

On February 5, 2016 at 4:59 AM, oldguystudent said:

Third conference win brings us to 7-6 at home. I smell an extension on the horizon!

Not funny. I think it's 50/50 that this happens.

physics90 · February 6, 2016

1 hour ago, UNT90 said:

Not funny. I think it's 50/50 that this happens.

If this happens, now we'll know where the President stands with regard to athletics.

UNT90 · February 6, 2016

Just now, physics90 said:

If this happens, now we'll know where the President stands with regard to athletics.

I think the President has zero authority to fire Rick Villarreal.

I think that power struggle has been fought and lost.

physics90 · February 6, 2016

7 hours ago, UNT90 said:

I think the President has zero authority to fire Rick Villarreal.

I think that power struggle has been fought and lost.

Wow! The first place I've heard where a President is lower than an AD.

Army of Dad · February 6, 2016

7 minutes ago, physics90 said:

Wow! The first place I've heard where a President is lower than an AD.

Money talks...

MeanGreenTexan · February 6, 2016

26 minutes ago, physics90 said:

Wow! The first place I've heard where a President is lower than an AD.

The President is lower than the Chancellor & BOR. If they wish for a specific person to remain in place, that person will.

UNT90 · February 8, 2016

On February 6, 2016 at 4:23 PM, MeanGreenTexan said:

The President is lower than the Chancellor & BOR. If they wish for a specific person to remain in place, that person will.

And sadly, I believe this is what has occurred.

Friendship over job performance.

untjim1995 · February 8, 2016

17 minutes ago, UNT90 said:

And sadly, I believe this is what has occurred.

Friendship over job performance.

It's brilliant, when you look at it from RV's standpoint. He won...by insulating himself within the web of 17 big moneyed donors that like athletics, while being at a place that administratively doesn't care much at all about them, RV has created the ultimate force-field of ever getting fired. Smatresk either couldn't get him fired or doesn't care enough about this to fire him. Either way, its status quo, from a leadership standpoint, and RV will win that battle every time going forward.

I congratulate him on the win. Several fans have quit on the program under his leadership, but there is absolutely no doubt who won. And that is why the Rick Villareal Athletic Department is as much of a certainty as the UNT 17 taking care of their buddy to continue to get access to their pet projects.

#UNTADforlife

UNT90 · February 8, 2016

2 minutes ago, untjim1995 said:

It's brilliant, when you look at it from RV's standpoint. He won...by insulating himself within the web of 17 big moneyed donors that like athletics, while being at a place that administratively doesn't care much at all about them, RV has created the ultimate force-field of ever getting fired. Smatresk either couldn't get him fired or doesn't care enough about this to fire him. Either way, its status quo, from a leadership standpoint, and RV will win that battle every time going forward.

I congratulate him on the win. Several fans have quit on the program under his leadership, but there is absolutely no doubt who won. And that is why the Rick Villareal Athletic Department is as much of a certainty as the UNT 17 taking care of their buddy to continue to get access to their pet projects.

#UNTADforlife

There is no doubt that Smatresk wanted him out, and no doubt that he couldn't get it done. @flyonthewall and friends should be congratulated on winning a battle against a new president that wanted better for UNT athletics. Now we all have to live with Rick Villarreal's "vision" of losing that will continue, beginning with the extension of Benford after this season.

Watch MGC levels this year. Watch how many walk away from club seats for which there is zero market for resale (especially if the increase in MGC donation level happens).

But that doesn't matter to those that want to keep Rick Villarreal around. He makes them feel special. He offers access that they know they won't get with another AD. It is the ultimate in personal manipulation.

As long as our biggest donors don't give a crap if UNT wins and refuse to hold a friend accountable, nothing will change around UNT athletics. I don't care if a young Nick Saban was the coach.

Those that think Littrell can be successful here just don't get it. I actually don't know why anyone would even take a head coaching job at UNT except for that fact that if you don't suffer the worst loss in college football history, you won't get fired for at least 4 years, maybe more ( see TonyBenford). It's a career killer with the current administration in place, and has been for the last 10 years.

Censored by Laurie · February 9, 2016

21 hours ago, UNT90 said:

There is no doubt that Smatresk wanted him out, and no doubt that he couldn't get it done. @flyonthewall and friends should be congratulated on winning a battle against a new president that wanted better for UNT athletics. Now we all have to live with Rick Villarreal's "vision" of losing that will continue, beginning with the extension of Benford after this season.

Watch MGC levels this year. Watch how many walk away from club seats for which there is zero market for resale (especially if the increase in MGC donation level happens).

But that doesn't matter to those that want to keep Rick Villarreal around. He makes them feel special. He offers access that they know they won't get with another AD. It is the ultimate in personal manipulation.

As long as our biggest donors don't give a crap if UNT wins and refuse to hold a friend accountable, nothing will change around UNT athletics. I don't care if a young Nick Saban was the coach.

Those that think Littrell can be successful here just don't get it. I actually don't know why anyone would even take a head coaching job at UNT except for that fact that if you don't suffer the worst loss in college football history, you won't get fired for at least 4 years, maybe more ( see TonyBenford). It's a career killer with the current administration in place, and has been for the last 10 years.

for someone who talks so much about politics you seemingly have no real idea how it actually works.

UNT90 · February 9, 2016

54 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

for someone who talks so much about politics you seemingly have no real idea how it actually works.

Ya, I guess I'm not much of a liar. That seems to be a requirement to understand politics, and to justify Rick Villarreal remaining as AD.

KRAM1 · February 9, 2016

On February 6, 2016 at 3:57 PM, physics90 said:

Wow! The first place I've heard where a President is lower than an AD.

And, you believe that? Really? If so, you must have actually failed physics.

Ben Gooding · February 10, 2016

Benford has to get to .500 or be damn close to it. If that happens, don't expect a firing. Don't expect an extension either. Too many good players to lose.

These aren't my words. Words of someone far more in tune than I.

KRAM1 · February 10, 2016

On February 8, 2016 at 11:35 AM, UNT90 said:

There is no doubt that Smatresk wanted him out, and no doubt that he couldn't get it done. @flyonthewall and friends should be congratulated on winning a battle against a new president that wanted better for UNT athletics. Now we all have to live with Rick Villarreal's "vision" of losing that will continue, beginning with the extension of Benford after this season.

Watch MGC levels this year. Watch how many walk away from club seats for which there is zero market for resale (especially if the increase in MGC donation level happens).

But that doesn't matter to those that want to keep Rick Villarreal around. He makes them feel special. He offers access that they know they won't get with another AD. It is the ultimate in personal manipulation.

As long as our biggest donors don't give a crap if UNT wins and refuse to hold a friend accountable, nothing will change around UNT athletics. I don't care if a young Nick Saban was the coach.

Those that think Littrell can be successful here just don't get it. I actually don't know why anyone would even take a head coaching job at UNT except for that fact that if you don't suffer the worst loss in college football history, you won't get fired for at least 4 years, maybe more ( see TonyBenford). It's a career killer with the current administration in place, and has been for the last 10 years.

Man, you have an incredibly weak grasp on reality when it comes to anything regarding Dr Smatresk and/or the BOR. Simply mind boggling. I am skeptical that you have even met the man.

Anyone here who thinks our university president is weak when it comes to decision making and weak when it comes to personnel matters is simply nuts! I know you think Granbury is the center of the universe, but when your "reality" comes from message board posts about things you think you know about President Smatresk, well you simply are mistaken.

You are letting your faux message board celebrity go to your head.

Edited February 10, 2016 by KRAM1

Green P1 · February 10, 2016

36 minutes ago, KRAM1 said:

You are letting your faux message board celebrity go to your head.

Ive taken to reading all his posts in double fake Donald Trump voice.... I can't tell if it makes me more or less insane.

Edited February 10, 2016 by Green P1

Ben Gooding · February 10, 2016

2 hours ago, KRAM1 said:

Man, you have an incredibly weak grasp on reality when it comes to anything regarding Dr Smatresk and/or the BOR. Simply mind boggling. I am skeptical that you have even met the man.

Anyone here who thinks our university president is weak when it comes to decision making and weak when it comes to personnel matters is simply nuts! I know you think Granbury is the center of the universe, but when your "reality" comes from message board posts about things you think you know about President Smatresk, well you simply are mistaken.

You are letting your faux message board celebrity go to your head.

Is that journalism dean still employed by UNT? Well, if so....

RV is as well still employed.

The former should of been canned immediately. That is an absolute breakdown of integrity. The latter, well...you know the W v L over the last 15 years staring at us in the face.

So, those are 2 employees that should absolutely, undoubtedly be let go and from what I know both are still clearing checks with UNT on them. That in and of itself is weak personnel decisions.

Quoner · February 10, 2016

13 minutes ago, Ben Gooding said:

Is that journalism dean still employed by UNT? Well, if so....

RV is as well still employed.

The former should of been canned immediately. That is an absolute breakdown of integrity. The latter, well...you know the W v L over the last 15 years staring at us in the face.

So, those are 2 employees that should absolutely, undoubtedly be let go and from what I know both are still clearing checks with UNT on them. That in and of itself is weak personnel decisions.

This was discussed at the time, but quietly eliminating this evil, wicked journalism dean at the end of the year - especially if a contract is expiring - is a much more effective method that eliminates a lot of idiotic sub-options like student protests, a battle in the media, or further politicizing the obvious. I know foresight isn't really your thing, but just a thought.

Edited February 10, 2016 by Quoner

Censored by Laurie · February 10, 2016

34 minutes ago, Quoner said:

This was discussed at the time, but quietly eliminating this evil, wicked journalism dean at the end of the year - especially if a contract is inspiring - is a much more effective method that eliminates a lot of idiotic sub-options like student protests, a battle in the media, or further politicizing the obvious. I know foresight isn't really your thing, but just a thought.

institutional public shaming or GTFO, bruh

Ben Gooding · February 10, 2016

16 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

institutional public shaming or GTFO, bruh

No. Not really. As far as contracts go, I'm sure in what she did is some sort of breach. That would by a tiny hurdle. Point is, she's still here after months.

Quoner · February 10, 2016

37 minutes ago, Ben Gooding said:

No. Not really. As far as contracts go, I'm sure in what she did is some sort of breach. That would by a tiny hurdle. Point is, she's still here after months.

I bet they didn't even check it - probably used her contract as a bib at one of those #UNT17 supper clubs and laughed about how mad it made you.

Ben Gooding · February 10, 2016

1 minute ago, Quoner said:

I bet they didn't even check it - probably used her contract as a bib at one of those #UNT17 supper clubs and laughed about how mad it made you.

It didn't make me mad at all. I couldn't care less. But it fits the topic of conversation pretty well and that's why it was brought up.

Quoner · February 10, 2016

3 hours ago, Ben Gooding said:

It didn't make me mad at all. I couldn't care less. But it fits the topic of conversation pretty well and that's why it was brought up.

Biggest upset of 2016 so far: La Tech win, Andrew turning on Benford, or you using "couldn't care less" vs. "could care less?"

UNTFan23 · February 10, 2016

3 hours ago, Ben Gooding said:

It didn't make me mad at all. I couldn't care less. But it fits the topic of conversation pretty well and that's why it was brought up.

You cared enough to bring it up.