Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Just chugged a gallon of Green Kool-aid:

SMU: W - Apogee Advantage & the players really dislike SMU
B-C: W - C'mon.  Please don't let me be wrong.
FL: L - C'mon.  Please let me be wrong.
Rice: L - This will be a close game.
MT: L - Away game against a team on their way up again.
Marshall: L - away against a top-tier C-USA team.
BYE - This is important to rest and prepare for...
Army: W - We need this one to give the team hope, or we're in for a spiraling end to the year.
UTSA: W - UTSA is awful.
LATech: L - close game though.
WKY: L - This is like our offense, except much more established. Even without Doughty, they're too strong
SoMS: L - Mullens too strong.
UTEP: W - UTEP is not good.

There you have it: 5-7.
Green-kool-aid-man.jpg

Edited by MeanGreenTexan
  • Upvote 2
Posted
1 minute ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

Just chugged a gallon of Green Kool-aid:

SMU: W - Apogee Advantage & the players really dislike SMU
B-C: W - C'mon.  Please don't let me be wrong.
FL: L - C'mon.  Please let me be wrong.
Rice: L - This will be a close game.
MT: L - Away game against a team on their way up again.
Marshall: L - away against a top-tier C-USA team.
BYE - This is important to rest and prepare for...
Army: W - We need this one to give the team hope, or we're in for a spiraling end to the year.
UTEP: W - UTEP is awful.
LATech: L - close game though.
WKY: L - This is like our offense, except much more established. Even without Doughty, they're too strong
SoMS: L - Mullens too strong.
UTEP: W - UTEP is not good.

There you have it: 5-7.
Green-kool-aid-man.jpg

How fortunate that we get UTEP twice this season...

  • Upvote 5
Posted

CBSsports.com has us ranked 126

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/rankings/cbs/128

 

SMU: Ranked 110 - Win - I see this going down to the wire

B-C: N/A - Win

FLA:  Ranked 26 - Loss

Rice: Ranked 65 - Loss

MTSU: Ranked 55 - Loss

Marshall: Ranked 53 - Loss

Army: Ranked 113 - Win

UTSA: Ranked 116 - Win

LA Tech: Ranked 80 - Loss

WKU: Ranked 39 - Loss

SoMiss: Ranked 34 - Loss

UTEP: Ranked 84 - Win

 

Record 5-7

  • Upvote 3
Posted
27 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

Just chugged a gallon of Green Kool-aid:

SMU: W - Apogee Advantage & the players really dislike SMU
B-C: W - C'mon.  Please don't let me be wrong.
FL: L - C'mon.  Please let me be wrong.
Rice: L - This will be a close game.
MT: L - Away game against a team on their way up again.
Marshall: L - away against a top-tier C-USA team.
BYE - This is important to rest and prepare for...
Army: W - We need this one to give the team hope, or we're in for a spiraling end to the year.
UTSA: W - UTSA is awful.
LATech: L - close game though.
WKY: L - This is like our offense, except much more established. Even without Doughty, they're too strong
SoMS: L - Mullens too strong.
UTEP: W - UTEP is not good.

There you have it: 5-7.
Green-kool-aid-man.jpg

 

20 minutes ago, NTAlum09 said:

CBSsports.com has us ranked 126

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/rankings/cbs/128

 

SMU: Ranked 110 - Win - I see this going down to the wire

B-C: N/A - Win

FLA:  Ranked 26 - Loss

Rice: Ranked 65 - Loss

MTSU: Ranked 55 - Loss

Marshall: Ranked 53 - Loss

Army: Ranked 113 - Win

UTSA: Ranked 116 - Win

LA Tech: Ranked 80 - Loss

WKU: Ranked 39 - Loss

SoMiss: Ranked 34 - Loss

UTEP: Ranked 84 - Win

 

Record 5-7

Here we go!

ce10a08093a0dfa4dbd3b13603780519.jpg

  • Upvote 4
Posted

Coach Littrell said we were going to a bowl game and I believe him.

SMU: W - Because they suck
B-C: W - Lightening ain't gonna strike twice.
FL: L - Not quite ready for the big upset.
Rice: W - Just not impressed with this team.
MT: L - Will be closer than many believe.
Marshall: L - away against a top-tier C-USA team.
BYE -
Army: W - Close at the half and then we pull away
UTSA: W - Because they really suck.
LATech: L - Could go our way with the homecoming push.  They have to replace a lot.
WKY: L - Strong team
SoMS: L - Good program again.
UTEP: W - Because they are from El Paso
 

  • Upvote 1
Posted
1 hour ago, untjim1995 said:

4, actually, but your point remains...

4, really? Like, REALLY? That is absolute BS and you should even understand that. Even lowly Dan McCarney had an up year in year 3. If we are doggy paddling through CUSA in year 3, I'll be ready for him to be shown the door*. 

 

*Recruiting momentum/failures will play a role in this. 

  • Upvote 2
Posted

4-8 but much much more fun to watch. I see them also way more competitive on the road.  A very fun team who could have had 6 wins had the ball bounced their way.  

Posted
3 hours ago, Got5onIt said:

I'm going with what I had down last year, again.

3-9

Seth has 3 seasons to get this team over .500, IMO.

 

 

I think by year three your prediction will be reversed to 9-3

Posted

5-7

 

SMU: W - At home....too much to prove. We with our atrocious offense should have beat them last year. Defense came to play and only collapsed at the end.
B-C: W -  Better win or else we have issues.
FL: L -  It's the Gators.
Rice: L - But it could be close
MT: L - Can go either way but we aren't there yet.
Marshall: L - shoot out battle....high scoring......but they win
BYE -
Army: W - destroy them
UTSA: W - Will have had their asses thrown around by this point....they will be 1-6 at worst and 2-5 at best.  
LATech: L - Too much to overcome

WKY: L - Just can't seem to beat them
SoMS: L - Loss
UTEP: W - We tear them a new one to end the season with 5 wins

Posted
2 hours ago, Ryan Munthe said:

5-7, easily. Laziness and poor research would put us down for much less.

As a former AD employee, it doesn't surprise me that you don't understand what laziness is and isn't...

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 7
Posted
2 hours ago, Ryan Munthe said:

5-7, easily. Laziness and poor research would put us down for much less.

SMU-W
BC-W
FL-L
Rice-W
MTSU-L
Marshall-L
Army-L
UTSA-W
La Tech-L
WKU-L
USM-L
UTEP-W

Laziness & poor research can also lead people to pick too many wins. It's not just about how good we might be. It's also about the other teams on our schedule. 

Like UTEP. Playing a smash mouth physical team with improved QB play at the end of the year doesn't bode well for a team with little depth and size. 

Or the fact that while we may be a better team than UTSA we get them after facing Army's triple option. Lots of teams struggle the week after playing service academy's. Injuries to the DL in that game may play a huge roll in the UTSA game. 

MTSU is still good but they've already lost 3 play makers to injury. Could be one of those seasons where the injury bug gets them. 

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1
Posted

4-8 this year, but I think we have several shootouts. I think depth will hurt us this year.

 

SMU-L
BC-W
FL-L
Rice-W
MTSU-L
Marshall-L
Army-L
UTSA-W
La Tech-L
WKU-L
USM-L
UTEP-W

Posted

Two factors why I think NT will do better than the majority of predictions.   NT was bad last year, but not as talent poor as the record indicated.   Secondly, I don't think the lack of scholarship players is as critical as some believe.  

NT would have been a bad team last year even if they played to their potential, but not 1-11 bad.  Lack of players will hurt depth but with the exception of Kirby, I don't think many others will be missed.  In most cases, the players no longer here were not going to fit into the current staff's plans and that is why they are gone. 

The big positive is that QB play should be vastly improved.  I also think the defense will be significantly better.

Based on the above rationale, my prediction is that NT will go 5-7 and be hard to handle by the end of the season.   

  • Upvote 3
Posted
2 hours ago, Harry said:

4-8 but much much more fun to watch. I see them also way more competitive on the road.  A very fun team who could have had 6 wins had the ball bounced their way.  

Harry, have you been intercepting my email? This is pretty much the gist of the email I sent to Brett Vito off my "private server".

Too many variables at work here for everything to go right every game. New coaches, new system, new players, short-handed in spots...what could go wrong? I am optimistic that this team will be well-coached, competitive and fun to watch. Go Mean Green!!

4 - 8

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Mean_Green09 said:

Laziness & poor research can also lead people to pick too many wins. It's not just about how good we might be. It's also about the other teams on our schedule. 

Like UTEP. Playing a smash mouth physical team with improved QB play at the end of the year doesn't bode well for a team with little depth and size. 

Or the fact that while we may be a better team than UTSA we get them after facing Army's triple option. Lots of teams struggle the week after playing service academy's. Injuries to the DL in that game may play a huge roll in the UTSA game. 

MTSU is still good but they've already lost 3 play makers to injury. Could be one of those seasons where the injury bug gets them. 

Or that both UTEP and UTSA are road games and UNT has been a TERRIBLE road team the last several years.

Or that we don't have a kicker that can make a 41 yard field goal consistently, if at all. 

But, hey, Seth Littrell is here, so all those things, plus an S ton more, magically disappear in the heads of the undereducated rah rah fans. 

Edited by UNT90
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 6
Posted

4-8. Much better team this year. Competitive football throughout the season. Fear depth issues and the conference teams visiting us at home are a rough draw. Would love to be shocked in a positive way for a change.

SMU-W
BC-W
FL-L
Rice-L
MTSU-L
Marshall-L
Army-W
UTSA-W
La Tech-L
WKU-L
USM-L
UTEP-L

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.