North Texas & Memphis One and One?

Christopher Walker · April 7, 2016

21 hours ago, UTSA Fan said:

My hope is winning cures a lot of ills. If the team rolls, I dont think people care too much about who it is. Wouldn't you agree? To that end, if RV is who he appears, you could still trump his influence with success?

Half-empty stadiums of double-digit win MAC and CUSA teams in years past disagree with you. Scheduling matters.

1 hour ago, UNTFan23 said:

Current Athletic Director is against 2 for or 3 for 1 deals. It really limits your scheduling options.

Moot point when he himself is his own rolling limit on scheduling options.

untjim1995 · April 7, 2016

30 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

"2 for 0 deals" = 2 paychecks.

"2 for 1 deals" = 0 paychecks, only the gate of the 1 home game.

We don't have the money to accomplish a 2 for 1 deal without having at least 1 (if not 2) 5-home-game schedules to balance the budget.

So, yes. The "2 for 0 deals" are much better.

No problem here at all with your logic...but it might be a good idea for the AD to not schedule a two-for-none with a P5 school that was specifically mentioned by folks who advocated for building a new stadium as someone we could now try and play against in Denton.

Because Iowa was specifically mentioned as someone that Apogee would allow us to try and schedule that Fouts wouldn't. Now, 5 years later, with a jewel of a stadium, we have hosted one P5 school that battles for the worst of that level in Indiana, two AAC schools in UH and SMU, Ball State, Idaho, and 3 FCS schools in Texas Southern, Nicholls State, and Portland State. This year, we can add FCS Butt Cookman to the list, then in the years to come, we can add Army, Lamar, Incarnate Word, Abilene Christian, and hopefully Memphis to the list.

Just to compare, at Fouts in the last five years of its existence as the toilet bowl of college stadiums, we hosted Kansas State, Rice, Ohio, Army, Tulsa, Navy, and SMU as OOC opponents, with no FCS opponents.

As I have said all along, at some point, there are going to be very loud groups wondering why we paid $78 million dollars and have an athletics fee when the previous dump was more than enough to cover the people and teams that came to town for a game. I sure as hell wouldn't want to be the one who has to answer as to why that was allowed at a place that is mostly apathetic (at best) to UNT sports. If we had run this program in a better fashion, from scheduling on down, it wouldn't ever cross my mind. But when you keep the worst AD in the country in charge after 15 years and he keeps on hiring losers and scheduling games as if he were having to get people to come to Denton HS' old stadium, its only natural to wonder when this will happen.

UNT90 · April 7, 2016

1 hour ago, UNTLifer said:

Again, you spout what has become your go to lines yet make zero suggestions. Still waiting on you to provide me with what you suggest we do at this point considering all other teams are scheduling 8 years out.

I'm not the AD. How about UNT does as well as conference foes in the scheduling department? How about scheduling one, just one RELEVANT P5 to play at Apogee?

How about not scheduling an FCS capable of strapping the worst loss in modern football history on your already distressed football program? How about not scheduling another FCS the very next year that is more than capable of beating your football team? Remember, these FCS games aren't scheduled "years in advance." Both Portland St and Butt Cookman were scheduled 8 to 9 months out, as I recall.

How about putting EFFORT into scheduling football games instead of scheduling 12 and 8 games series plus one whore and one FCS just to get it off your plate.

How about having a comprehensive plan that includes who you target to play and when in order to build a football program. I GUARANTEE that isn't happening inside the AD at UNT.

Edited April 7, 2016 by UNT90

Cerebus · April 7, 2016

1 hour ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

"2 for 0 deals" = 2 paychecks.

"2 for 1 deals" = 0 paychecks, only the gate of the 1 home game.

We don't have the money to accomplish a 2 for 1 deal without having at least 1 (if not 2) 5-home-game schedules to balance the budget.

So, yes. The "2 for 0 deals" are much better.

Usually 2 for 1s are for half a check. However sometimes the P5 school will front load both away games and then just pay the buyout to get out of the return.

UNTLifer · April 8, 2016

5 hours ago, UNT90 said:

I'm not the AD. How about UNT does as well as conference foes in the scheduling department? How about scheduling one, just one RELEVANT P5 to play at Apogee?

How about not scheduling an FCS capable of strapping the worst loss in modern football history on your already distressed football program? How about not scheduling another FCS the very next year that is more than capable of beating your football team? Remember, these FCS games aren't scheduled "years in advance." Both Portland St and Butt Cookman were scheduled 8 to 9 months out, as I recall.

How about putting EFFORT into scheduling football games instead of scheduling 12 and 8 games series plus one whore and one FCS just to get it off your plate.

How about having a comprehensive plan that includes who you target to play and when in order to build a football program. I GUARANTEE that isn't happening inside the AD at UNT.

And if you look above you will see where a number of our fellow universities schedule the same way. If it were as easy as you say, I am sure everyone would schedule a relevant P5 at home. Usually, scheduling a relevant P5 at home means you signed a 2 for 1 deal that comes back to bite you in the form of a 5 home game schedule in the future. It is always easy from this side of the fence. Not defending RV, just pointing out the obvious, something that slaps you in the face daily yet you just ignore it.

UNT90 · April 8, 2016

10 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

And if you look above you will see where a number of our fellow universities schedule the same way. If it were as easy as you say, I am sure everyone would schedule a relevant P5 at home. Usually, scheduling a relevant P5 at home means you signed a 2 for 1 deal that comes back to bite you in the form of a 5 home game schedule in the future. It is always easy from this side of the fence. Not defending RV, just pointing out the obvious, something that slaps you in the face daily yet you just ignore it.

You pulled one year of those teams' schedules. This ain't a one year problem at UNT. It's been a problem for a long long time. Did you check and see if any of those schools had home P5s scheduled in the year before or after? You know, of the ones that you gave as examples that didn't have a P5 scheduled? Because several did.

Taking one year of a schedule is a an uneducated argument. Do better.

Edited April 8, 2016 by UNT90

VideoEagle · April 8, 2016

9 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

And if you look above you will see where a number of our fellow universities schedule the same way. If it were as easy as you say, I am sure everyone would schedule a relevant P5 at home. Usually, scheduling a relevant P5 at home means you signed a 2 for 1 deal that comes back to bite you in the form of a 5 home game schedule in the future. It is always easy from this side of the fence. Not defending RV, just pointing out the obvious, something that slaps you in the face daily yet you just ignore it.

You are trying to reason with a fence post. Of course 2 for 1 deals will require a single home game to avoid 5 home game seasons, that's basic math. But in a effort to make everything RV does evil, if we schedule a 2 for 1 as other schools do that's terrible. If we don't, RV isn't getting the job done and is terrible. Third option - schedule balanced series with regional, recognizable opponents. This must be discredited as well, so how about they aren't really "known" to our fans or it's "too far" in the future or they aren't in the "right" conference or being in the same market as JerryWorld is the same for lots of other schools and they "get it done." In other words, anything to discredit anyone in the athletic department and now in the University administration.

By the way, comparing the status of Reliant Stadium to ATT Stadium is comparing Six Flags to Disney World.

The Memphis series is a good thing. It doesn't cure all the scheduling ills, but it's a good thing. The athletic department did something positive and some are so desperate to express hatred they can't accept that. Use the ignore feature and don't respond to hatred.

UNT90 · April 8, 2016

16 hours ago, untjim1995 said:

No problem here at all with your logic...but it might be a good idea for the AD to not schedule a two-for-none with a P5 school that was specifically mentioned by folks who advocated for building a new stadium as someone we could now try and play against in Denton.

Because Iowa was specifically mentioned as someone that Apogee would allow us to try and schedule that Fouts wouldn't. Now, 5 years later, with a jewel of a stadium, we have hosted one P5 school that battles for the worst of that level in Indiana, two AAC schools in UH and SMU, Ball State, Idaho, and 3 FCS schools in Texas Southern, Nicholls State, and Portland State. This year, we can add FCS Butt Cookman to the list, then in the years to come, we can add Army, Lamar, Incarnate Word, Abilene Christian, and hopefully Memphis to the list.

Just to compare, at Fouts in the last five years of its existence as the toilet bowl of college stadiums, we hosted Kansas State, Rice, Ohio, Army, Tulsa, Navy, and SMU as OOC opponents, with no FCS opponents.

As I have said all along, at some point, there are going to be very loud groups wondering why we paid $78 million dollars and have an athletics fee when the previous dump was more than enough to cover the people and teams that came to town for a game. I sure as hell wouldn't want to be the one who has to answer as to why that was allowed at a place that is mostly apathetic (at best) to UNT sports. If we had run this program in a better fashion, from scheduling on down, it wouldn't ever cross my mind. But when you keep the worst AD in the country in charge after 15 years and he keeps on hiring losers and scheduling games as if he were having to get people to come to Denton HS' old stadium, its only natural to wonder when this will happen.

And I think the question will come from the students, who are paying a large chunk of the stadium costs and receiving ZERO additional benefit for their money. At some point (I think really soon) they are going to ask why.

And the only answer is "well, Rick Villarreal is a nice guy and we like keeping him around." Won't be nearly good enough

1 hour ago, VideoEagle said:

You are trying to reason with a fence post. Of course 2 for 1 deals will require a single home game to avoid 5 home game seasons, that's basic math. But in a effort to make everything RV does evil, if we schedule a 2 for 1 as other schools do that's terrible. If we don't, RV isn't getting the job done and is terrible. Third option - schedule balanced series with regional, recognizable opponents. This must be discredited as well, so how about they aren't really "known" to our fans or it's "too far" in the future or they aren't in the "right" conference or being in the same market as JerryWorld is the same for lots of other schools and they "get it done." In other words, anything to discredit anyone in the athletic department and now in the University administration.

By the way, comparing the status of Reliant Stadium to ATT Stadium is comparing Six Flags to Disney World.

The Memphis series is a good thing. It doesn't cure all the scheduling ills, but it's a good thing. The athletic department did something positive and some are so desperate to express hatred they can't accept that. Use the ignore feature and don't respond to hatred.

Imagine you jumping on to defend RV. Shocked.

So how did we have two 5 home game seasons the last 4 years without having a P5 or a 2 for 1 scheduled? Do you get that if you are going to have 5 home game seasons, you just might want to have a marque P5 at home to ease the pain? Wait, I forget, you like having Portland St and Texas Southern roll into town as the ONLY OOC home game. What was I thinking.

Its never ceases to amaze how people like you have zero standards for this program. Just go along to get along, no matter how many 1-11 seasons you have to endure. At least you still have that RV relationship, right?

Enjoy FCS competition, because that is where this thing is headed.

EDIT: And to think UNT has to do a 2 for 1 to get a P5 to Denton is laughable. Conference mates are doing 1 and 1s with P5s. But, I mean, how can we expect the Hattiesburg Hustler to do what the AD at Charolette can do, right?

Edited April 8, 2016 by UNT90