MGB: Three reasons UNT will be better next year (now with three reasons UNT will be worse)

[Harry]

Brett is right, C-USA will be rough next season.  We could be an improved team and still lose a fair amount of games especially against MUTS, UAB and La Tech. I doubt UTEP and WKU will stay down either.

[UNT90]

4 hours ago, Harry said:

Brett is right, C-USA will be rough next season.  We could be an improved team and still lose a fair amount of games especially against MUTS, UAB and La Tech. I doubt UTEP and WKU will stay down either.

UNT will be lucky to end up next season with less than 20 losses.

And Neal Smatresk and the UNT administration could give a crap.

[Army of Dad]

15 hours ago, drex said:

Bedford better hope that Littrell has a terrible first season.  If Seth turns it around quickly it will show what can be accomplished with a coaching change.

Why? It's not like Benford has been held to any kind of standard so far. 

[Greendylan]

20 minutes ago, Army of Dad said:

Why? It's not like Benford has been held to any kind of standard so far. 

Exactly, but we have to ask why that is.  Here's my fear:  What if Benford's retention (with only a platitudinous explanation) was effectively our university's administration declaring that UNT will no longer concern itself with progress in basketball?  In other words, no inessential expense (such as a modest one-year buyout) will be committed to our basketball program.

I'm sure the powers that be recognize that Benford is not magically going to turn this team into a deep NCAA tournament team after 4 underperforming seasons.  But, they probably assume that there will be enough talent next year to get to 1 or 2 games over .500.  1 winning record every 5 years may just be considered our new standard, as we continue to hide behind the false rhetoric of "this is a tough place to win" that was spewed all over the football program the last couple of years.  I really hope I'm wrong.

[FirefightnRick]

On April 1, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Greendylan said:

Exactly, but we have to ask why that is.  Here's my fear:  What if Benford's retention (with only a platitudinous explanation) was effectively our university's administration declaring that UNT will no longer concern itself with progress in basketball?  In other words, no inessential expense (such as a modest one-year buyout) will be committed to our basketball program.

I'm sure the powers that be recognize that Benford is not magically going to turn this team into a deep NCAA tournament team after 4 underperforming seasons.  But, they probably assume that there will be enough talent next year to get to 1 or 2 games over .500.  1 winning record every 5 years may just be considered our new standard, as we continue to hide behind the false rhetoric of "this is a tough place to win" that was spewed all over the football program the last couple of years.  I really hope I'm wrong.

Then there's absolutely zero reason to retain an athletic director as well.  

 

Rick