Dickey, Villareal contract extensions

Eagle1855 · August 18, 2005

The second we win a few non conference games and/or break the top 25, DD is gone, IMO. It happens all the time. The 'have nots' get raided by the 'haves' once they prove they can be a competitor. I just hope our university has the sense to bring in another good coach, maybe even one with a name and not move backwards. Coaches make or break a team.

Punting on 4th and 1 is stupid, especially when you are down by 20 in the 4th. If you have only managed to score 14 points in the first three quarters, what would make you think you could score 3 TD's in the 4th qtr? Go for it, get your team fired up. Show some faith in your O-line. It just shows a lack of agressiveness. Which is also my complaint about the UT game.

MootPoint · August 18, 2005

Gakusei · August 18, 2005

The second we win a few non conference games and/or break the top 25, DD is gone, IMO.
←

Awesome. We've got him locked up indefinitely in that case.

MootPoint · August 18, 2005

Awesome. We've got him locked up indefinitely in that case.
←

or

Eagle-96 · August 18, 2005

Punting on 4th and 1 is stupid, especially when you are down by 20 in the 4th. If you have only managed to score 14 points in the first three quarters, what would make you think you could score 3 TD's in the 4th qtr? Go for it, get your team fired up. Show some faith in your O-line. It just shows a lack of agressiveness. Which is also my complaint about the UT game.
←

I just don't think we can equate a lack of aggresiveness with giving up.

Eagle1855 · August 18, 2005

I just don't think we can equate a lack of aggresiveness with giving up.
←

Well it is if its a lack of aggressive play calling-- that or its a mistake bt the coach, you pick. What would make a team think they could win if their coach doesnt have confidence in them to move the ball 3 feet?

MootPoint · August 18, 2005

This thread could end up being the one that never ends

Baby Arm! · August 18, 2005

Yes, in fact, if you carefully watch the game film... *just* as DD takes a sip of his diet coke... you see J-Mo's hamstring snap back and to the left!
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left...
!
←

Highly underated post. I actually did a spit take when I read it.

Back and to the Left.... Classic

Eagle-96 · August 18, 2005

Yes, in fact, if you carefully watch the game film... *just* as DD takes a sip of his diet coke... you see J-Mo's hamstring snap back and to the left!
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left...
!
←

Stupid Keith Hernandez and his magic loogies.

Edited August 18, 2005 by Eagle-96

GrandGreen · August 18, 2005

So, we should rank our recruits *NOT* by how they performed on the field, but how many people we beat to get them? Grand, excuse me, but thats INSANE.
No one besides us recruited Patrick Cobbs. No one, not one single 1A offer.
No one besides us recruited Brandon Monroe. Again, not another 1a offer.
So because of that, they are worth less than James Battle? I mean, the competition for Battle was intense, and alot of people offered him. Man, wish we could have landed him instead of Patrick Cobbs.
And, SMU beats us in recruiting every year. Thier classes are ranked higher, they get more state 100 recruits, they get more people that other schools are after. Guess what? We would still beat them.
You are putting way too much effort into these recruit rankings. I personally think our coaching staff is one of the best in the state in finding real talent. Some of the very best people on our teams only received a scholie offer from us.
←

Insane? Geez, I did not know that some highly rated recruits don't turn out ,or there are a lot of lightly recruited player that end up being great.

Typical response to any critism or in this case comment about NT recruiting. The topic was is contract status a major consideration for NT recruits. The fact that DD does not go after the identified top notch recruits would seem to me to indicate contract status is at most a small factor. I guess that if DD did not have a long term contract, NT would have missed out on a lot of great players that had only a NT 1a offer.

ADLER · August 18, 2005

Yes, in fact, if you carefully watch the game film... *just* as DD takes a sip of his diet coke... you see J-Mo's hamstring snap back and to the left!
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left
*rewind* Back and to the Left...
!
←

Are you suggesting that there was a second sipper?

Eagle-96 · August 18, 2005

Are you suggesting that there was a second sipper?
←

There are reports that a second sipper was seen holding a Diet Rite behind a wooden fence but these have not been proven.

stebo · August 18, 2005

Insane? Geez, I did not know that some highly rated recruits don't turn out ,or there are a lot of lightly recruited player that end up being great.
Typical response to any critism or in this case comment about NT recruiting. The topic was is contract status a major consideration for NT recruits. The fact that DD does not go after the identified top notch recruits would seem to me to indicate contract status is at most a small factor. I guess that if DD did not have a long term contract, NT would have missed out on a lot of great players that had only a NT 1a offer.
←

On recruiting: DD goes after everyone he can. Even Adrian Peterson was quoted in the Sporting News last year as saying that North Texas was one of the first schools to recruit him - he just had his eyes set on a BCS program. What we do is go after players that show interest back in us. We have a limited budget when it comes to recruiting and canot afford to be chasing after players that have zero interest in us. If we staretd to operate that way, we would end up with recruiting class the size of San Jose State. Tomey came into that position last year and thought that he could outwait a lot of the BCS schools and ended up having a 13 man recruiting class - with "more to come"... well, the more never came. Because of this, they are going into Fal practice with 10 scholarship frosh players and a ton of walk-ons that were not offered by anyone.

As for DD's blunder in Waco last year - I will agree with both sides. I SEE the logic behind it. But I do not agree with it. If that had been NMSU and we had been playing for the bowl bid for that game, there is no way in hell that we would have punted. I just don't like playing our OOC games DIFFERENTLY then we play our conference games. I understand that Dickey was getting the new players used to the system so that when conference play came around there was continuity for them. But that is what scrimmages and practices are for in my opinion. By punting on 4th and 1 rather then going for the 1st down/a score that would cut the score down to 13, he offically conceded the game thus handled the Baylor game as a pre-season game that doesn't "count", in other words - a scrimmage.

That is what pisses me off but I have gotten used to it. These tactics used to get me really riled up; but after 8 years I have grown used to them. DD has one playbook and it isn't going to change because of me. I am convinced of that. And I am fine with that as long as he gets me back to New Orleans every year. I still don't agree with it though - I think that OOC games really make us look bad, especially losing in state OOC games to very poor teams like Baylor. Our win against Baylor in 2003 brought out more people and got more interest in the Mean Green then the bowl game that year. As bad as the MUTS have been - their non-conference wins still are much "sexier" then having them fall short in conference play. Troy's wins against Missouri and Marshall last year have them going into the season ranked above us in most ranking services... Heck, they lost not one but two SUN BELT conference games and still got invited to a bowl as an at large team because of the quality wins in those OOC games. They have proven that they play to win every game, not just conference games. I know that DD does not want to lose OOC games - but I believe that he treats them as scrimmages. He uses them as a means to teach the team his system and get them ready for conference play. That has been enough for us until this year. It is time to raise the bar. It is time to put the emphasis on winning OOC games and letting the other games in conference take care of themselves, even if we lose a game or two in conference. That would actually benefit the conference significantly this year if we were to beat Tulsa and La Tech and lose to ULM... it would show that Sun Belt teams can beat teams in other mid major conferences and then get beat by teams in their own conference. It would show that the Belt has moved up another notch.

Finally, on the contract stuff - I think that the BOR is doing all that they can to try and give our program some healthy breathing room for the next 5 years. We are entering a time of uncertainty (sp?).. This extension will cover their butts while the new BOR comes in and does whatever it is that they are going to do. It is obvious to me that LJ is trying to pull the emphasis away from the football team and put it back on academics. We have Pohl leaving soon to be replaced by ???? And next summer we get a new BOR, that scares the hell out of this Mean Green fan.

I believe that the current BOR sees the (potential) storm on the horizon and is trying to set up the system/contract so that we are covered no matter who gets put into those seats starting next summer. The one thing that dissapoints me the most about the contract extension (this time around) is that a buy-out clause has still not been inserted into the contract. Right now there is a small buy-out clause in the contract if DD were to take a job at another school - I think we should have a rather large one. Why? We deserve it. We gave Dickey complete control of the football program - let him play out his OOC games as scrimmages, and let him make comments to the media about it being "them against the world" - and that is all fine as long as he keeps winning. But I think that the University needs to be rewarded for taking the risk on Coach Dickey and sticking by him through his growing pains/the rough times if another school comes calling.

Every time they change or extend his contract I look for this clause to be inserted (a buy-out clause) and I have yet to see it. I am dissapointed that they (the BOR) had the opportunity to tweak his contract once again and add this clause and they chose not to do so. Maybe he won't agree to it, that is a possibility... but if a school wants him bad enough then they will pay that buy-out clause with no problem. Then we can use that money to bring back DeLoach (or promote Kenny Evans) as our HC.

Sorry for the long post - my vacation is almost over so I won't be able to post my Plumm style posts after next week so I have to enjoy it whole I can

Eagle-96 · August 18, 2005

On recruiting: DD goes after everyone he can. Even Adrian Peterson was quoted in the Sporting News last year as saying that North Texas was one of the first schools to recruit him - he just had his eyes set on a BCS program. What we do is go after players that show interest back in us. We have a limited budget when it comes to recruiting and canot afford to be chasing after players that have zero interest in us. If we staretd to operate that way, we would end up with recruiting class the size of San Jose State. Tomey came into that position last year and thought that he could outwait a lot of the BCS schools and ended up having a 13 man recruiting class - with "more to come"... well, the more never came. Because of this, they are going into Fal practice with 10 scholarship frosh players and a ton of walk-ons that were not offered by anyone.
As for DD's blunder in Waco last year - I will agree with both sides. I SEE the logic behind it. But I do not agree with it. If that had been NMSU and we had been playing for the bowl bid for that game, there is no way in hell that we would have punted. I just don't like playing our OOC games DIFFERENTLY then we play our conference games. I understand that Dickey was getting the new players used to the system so that when conference play came around there was continuity for them. But that is what scrimmages and practices are for in my opinion. By punting on 4th and 1 rather then going for the 1st down/a score that would cut the score down to 13, he offically conceded the game thus handled the Baylor game as a pre-season game that doesn't "count", in other words - a scrimmage.
That is what pisses me off but I have gotten used to it. These tactics used to get me really riled up; but after 8 years I have grown used to them. DD has one playbook and it isn't going to change because of me. I am convinced of that. And I am fine with that as long as he gets me back to New Orleans every year. I still don't agree with it though - I think that OOC games really make us look bad, especially losing in state OOC games to very poor teams like Baylor. Our win against Baylor in 2003 brought out more people and got more interest in the Mean Green then the bowl game that year. As bad as the MUTS have been - their non-conference wins still are much "sexier" then having them fall short in conference play. Troy's wins against Missouri and Marshall last year have them going into the season ranked above us in most ranking services... Heck, they lost not one but two SUN BELT conference games and still got invited to a bowl as an at large team because of the quality wins in those OOC games. They have proven that they play to win every game, not just conference games. I know that DD does not want to lose OOC games - but I believe that he treats them as scrimmages. He uses them as a means to teach the team his system and get them ready for conference play. That has been enough for us until this year. It is time to raise the bar. It is time to put the emphasis on winning OOC games and letting the other games in conference take care of themselves, even if we lose a game or two in conference. That would actually benefit the conference significantly this year if we were to beat Tulsa and La Tech and lose to ULM... it would show that Sun Belt teams can beat teams in other mid major conferences and then get beat by teams in their own conference. It would show that the Belt has moved up another notch.
Finally, on the contract stuff - I think that the BOR is doing all that they can to try and give our program some healthy breathing room for the next 5 years. We are entering a time of uncertainty (sp?).. This extension will cover their butts while the new BOR comes in and does whatever it is that they are going to do. It is obvious to me that LJ is trying to pull the emphasis away from the football team and put it back on academics. We have Pohl leaving soon to be replaced by ???? And next summer we get a new BOR, that scares the hell out of this Mean Green fan.
I believe that the current BOR sees the (potential) storm on the horizon and is trying to set up the system/contract so that we are covered no matter who gets put into those seats starting next summer. The one thing that dissapoints me the most about the contract extension (this time around) is that a buy-out clause has still not been inserted into the contract. Right now there is a small buy-out clause in the contract if DD were to take a job at another school - I think we should have a rather large one. Why? We deserve it. We gave Dickey complete control of the football program - let him play out his OOC games as scrimmages, and let him make comments to the media about it being "them against the world" - and that is all fine as long as he keeps winning. But I think that the University needs to be rewarded for taking the risk on Coach Dickey and sticking by him through his growing pains/the rough times if another school comes calling.
Every time they change or extend his contract I look for this clause to be inserted (a buy-out clause) and I have yet to see it. I am dissapointed that they (the BOR) had the opportunity to tweak his contract once again and add this clause and they chose not to do so. Maybe he won't agree to it, that is a possibility... but if a school wants him bad enough then they will pay that buy-out clause with no problem. Then we can use that money to bring back DeLoach (or promote Kenny Evans) as our HC.
Sorry for the long post - my vacation is almost over so I won't be able to post my Plumm style posts after next week so I have to enjoy it whole I can
←

Could you elaborate a little.

UNTLifer · August 18, 2005

On recruiting: DD goes after everyone he can. Even Adrian Peterson was quoted in the Sporting News last year as saying that North Texas was one of the first schools to recruit him - he just had his eyes set on a BCS program. What we do is go after players that show interest back in us. We have a limited budget when it comes to recruiting and canot afford to be chasing after players that have zero interest in us. If we staretd to operate that way, we would end up with recruiting class the size of San Jose State. Tomey came into that position last year and thought that he could outwait a lot of the BCS schools and ended up having a 13 man recruiting class - with "more to come"... well, the more never came. Because of this, they are going into Fal practice with 10 scholarship frosh players and a ton of walk-ons that were not offered by anyone.
As for DD's blunder in Waco last year - I will agree with both sides. I SEE the logic behind it. But I do not agree with it. If that had been NMSU and we had been playing for the bowl bid for that game, there is no way in hell that we would have punted. I just don't like playing our OOC games DIFFERENTLY then we play our conference games. I understand that Dickey was getting the new players used to the system so that when conference play came around there was continuity for them. But that is what scrimmages and practices are for in my opinion. By punting on 4th and 1 rather then going for the 1st down/a score that would cut the score down to 13, he offically conceded the game thus handled the Baylor game as a pre-season game that doesn't "count", in other words - a scrimmage.
That is what pisses me off but I have gotten used to it. These tactics used to get me really riled up; but after 8 years I have grown used to them. DD has one playbook and it isn't going to change because of me. I am convinced of that. And I am fine with that as long as he gets me back to New Orleans every year. I still don't agree with it though - I think that OOC games really make us look bad, especially losing in state OOC games to very poor teams like Baylor. Our win against Baylor in 2003 brought out more people and got more interest in the Mean Green then the bowl game that year. As bad as the MUTS have been - their non-conference wins still are much "sexier" then having them fall short in conference play. Troy's wins against Missouri and Marshall last year have them going into the season ranked above us in most ranking services... Heck, they lost not one but two SUN BELT conference games and still got invited to a bowl as an at large team because of the quality wins in those OOC games. They have proven that they play to win every game, not just conference games. I know that DD does not want to lose OOC games - but I believe that he treats them as scrimmages. He uses them as a means to teach the team his system and get them ready for conference play. That has been enough for us until this year. It is time to raise the bar. It is time to put the emphasis on winning OOC games and letting the other games in conference take care of themselves, even if we lose a game or two in conference. That would actually benefit the conference significantly this year if we were to beat Tulsa and La Tech and lose to ULM... it would show that Sun Belt teams can beat teams in other mid major conferences and then get beat by teams in their own conference. It would show that the Belt has moved up another notch.
Finally, on the contract stuff - I think that the BOR is doing all that they can to try and give our program some healthy breathing room for the next 5 years. We are entering a time of uncertainty (sp?).. This extension will cover their butts while the new BOR comes in and does whatever it is that they are going to do. It is obvious to me that LJ is trying to pull the emphasis away from the football team and put it back on academics. We have Pohl leaving soon to be replaced by ???? And next summer we get a new BOR, that scares the hell out of this Mean Green fan.
I believe that the current BOR sees the (potential) storm on the horizon and is trying to set up the system/contract so that we are covered no matter who gets put into those seats starting next summer. The one thing that dissapoints me the most about the contract extension (this time around) is that a buy-out clause has still not been inserted into the contract. Right now there is a small buy-out clause in the contract if DD were to take a job at another school - I think we should have a rather large one. Why? We deserve it. We gave Dickey complete control of the football program - let him play out his OOC games as scrimmages, and let him make comments to the media about it being "them against the world" - and that is all fine as long as he keeps winning. But I think that the University needs to be rewarded for taking the risk on Coach Dickey and sticking by him through his growing pains/the rough times if another school comes calling.
Every time they change or extend his contract I look for this clause to be inserted (a buy-out clause) and I have yet to see it. I am dissapointed that they (the BOR) had the opportunity to tweak his contract once again and add this clause and they chose not to do so. Maybe he won't agree to it, that is a possibility... but if a school wants him bad enough then they will pay that buy-out clause with no problem. Then we can use that money to bring back DeLoach (or promote Kenny Evans) as our HC.
Sorry for the long post - my vacation is almost over so I won't be able to post my Plumm style posts after next week so I have to enjoy it whole I can
←

Based on you last paragraph, Dude, go back to work.

Edited August 18, 2005 by UNTLifer

good_ken · August 18, 2005

Stebo - It was my understanding that LJ has retained a marketing firm to examine Dickey's playbook. They may even have formed a comittee to examine how the playbook relatesx to the promotion of the law school.

Cerebus · August 18, 2005

The topic was is contract status a major consideration for NT recruits.

Oh is it? Thank you so much, I though it was whether or not DD's play calling was causing Stockholm Syndrome to break out among the fan base.

Back on topic, the I never argued whether or not recruiting was affected by DD's contract. Go back and read my posts, what I disagreed with you about was:

Since DD's recruiting sytle is essentially to recruit the best players possible after most of the schools have met their recruiting quotas;

To which I said something to the effect of "no, we did recruit head to head against some schools and won some of those". Also lost too, we had a great JUCO qb coming in this year until Nebraska pulled him from us.

But, as you can see, I never said anything about contract length in that. Then you responded by saying:

Look at Texas Football ratings of NT last recruiting class, not only last but last by a long shot. Before you downgrade the recruiting ratings, which is the usual response. Think about the issue being discussed, not how good the recruits turn out to be but the competition for the recruits. When an 1-A program can count on one hand the number of recuits with multiple I-A offers then I doubt contract status is a major recruiting factor.

Again, I said nothing about contract status. I just stated that your "don't think about the results, but how they where recruited by others" was a really bad way to think about recruiting performance.

The fact that DD does not go after the identified top notch recruits would seem to me to indicate contract status is at most a small factor.

He does, he calls everyone. But, if you call Adrian Peterson, and he has OU and UT banging on his door, and he is showing you no intrest at all, your time is better spent trying to find someone who is talented and has a good chance of signing with you.

Jamario is a kid that we contacted, and alot of other people contacted, but he never blew us off. In that case, you keep calling, and maybe, just maybe, you get to sign a great player.

I guess that if DD did not have a long term contract, NT would have missed out on a lot of great players that had only a NT 1a offer.

Once again, I never said a word about contract, your getting the people who are debating with you confused.

Cerebus · August 18, 2005

Also, I think plumm hacked stebo's account

Stan R · August 18, 2005

wow, great post Stebo, right on the money.

Eagle-96 · August 18, 2005

Oh is it? Thank you so much, I though it was whether or not DD's play calling was causing Stockholm Syndrome to break out among the fan base.
Back on topic, the I never argued whether or not recruiting was affected by DD's contract. Go back and read my posts, what I disagreed with you about was:
To which I said something to the effect of "no, we did recruit head to head against some schools and won some of those". Also lost too, we had a great JUCO qb coming in this year until Nebraska pulled him from us.
But, as you can see, I never said anything about contract length in that. Then you responded by saying:
Again, I said nothing about contract status. I just stated that your "don't think about the results, but how they where recruited by others" was a really bad way to think about recruiting performance.
He does, he calls everyone. But, if you call Adrian Peterson, and he has OU and UT banging on his door, and he is showing you no intrest at all, your time is better spent trying to find someone who is talented and has a good chance of signing with you.
Jamario is a kid that we contacted, and alot of other people contacted, but he never blew us off. In that case, you keep calling, and maybe, just maybe, you get to sign a great player.
Once again, I never said a word about contract, your getting the people who are debating with you confused.
←

I am the guilty party that made reference to DD's contract length and recruiting.

If a coach has one year remaining on his contraact, that is going to scare recruits away due to the fact that there is an apperance that the schools administration lacks confidence in the coach. Players choose coaches as much as they choose schools. I am sure there are running backs that have chosen NT due to our ball control run first philosophy used by DD. If a player thinks a coach might not be around for the length of the players time at a school, that might affect their decision. You can be sure other coaches will use a contract lenght against a lame-duck coach as a negative.

NTEagle08 · August 18, 2005

On recruiting: DD goes after everyone he can. Even Adrian Peterson was quoted in the Sporting News last year as saying that North Texas was one of the first schools to recruit him - he just had his eyes set on a BCS program. What we do is go after players that show interest back in us. We have a limited budget when it comes to recruiting and canot afford to be chasing after players that have zero interest in us. If we staretd to operate that way, we would end up with recruiting class the size of San Jose State. Tomey came into that position last year and thought that he could outwait a lot of the BCS schools and ended up having a 13 man recruiting class - with "more to come"... well, the more never came. Because of this, they are going into Fal practice with 10 scholarship frosh players and a ton of walk-ons that were not offered by anyone.
As for DD's blunder in Waco last year - I will agree with both sides. I SEE the logic behind it. But I do not agree with it. If that had been NMSU and we had been playing for the bowl bid for that game, there is no way in hell that we would have punted. I just don't like playing our OOC games DIFFERENTLY then we play our conference games. I understand that Dickey was getting the new players used to the system so that when conference play came around there was continuity for them. But that is what scrimmages and practices are for in my opinion. By punting on 4th and 1 rather then going for the 1st down/a score that would cut the score down to 13, he offically conceded the game thus handled the Baylor game as a pre-season game that doesn't "count", in other words - a scrimmage.
That is what pisses me off but I have gotten used to it. These tactics used to get me really riled up; but after 8 years I have grown used to them. DD has one playbook and it isn't going to change because of me. I am convinced of that. And I am fine with that as long as he gets me back to New Orleans every year. I still don't agree with it though - I think that OOC games really make us look bad, especially losing in state OOC games to very poor teams like Baylor. Our win against Baylor in 2003 brought out more people and got more interest in the Mean Green then the bowl game that year. As bad as the MUTS have been - their non-conference wins still are much "sexier" then having them fall short in conference play. Troy's wins against Missouri and Marshall last year have them going into the season ranked above us in most ranking services... Heck, they lost not one but two SUN BELT conference games and still got invited to a bowl as an at large team because of the quality wins in those OOC games. They have proven that they play to win every game, not just conference games. I know that DD does not want to lose OOC games - but I believe that he treats them as scrimmages. He uses them as a means to teach the team his system and get them ready for conference play. That has been enough for us until this year. It is time to raise the bar. It is time to put the emphasis on winning OOC games and letting the other games in conference take care of themselves, even if we lose a game or two in conference. That would actually benefit the conference significantly this year if we were to beat Tulsa and La Tech and lose to ULM... it would show that Sun Belt teams can beat teams in other mid major conferences and then get beat by teams in their own conference. It would show that the Belt has moved up another notch.
Finally, on the contract stuff - I think that the BOR is doing all that they can to try and give our program some healthy breathing room for the next 5 years. We are entering a time of uncertainty (sp?).. This extension will cover their butts while the new BOR comes in and does whatever it is that they are going to do. It is obvious to me that LJ is trying to pull the emphasis away from the football team and put it back on academics. We have Pohl leaving soon to be replaced by ???? And next summer we get a new BOR, that scares the hell out of this Mean Green fan.
I believe that the current BOR sees the (potential) storm on the horizon and is trying to set up the system/contract so that we are covered no matter who gets put into those seats starting next summer. The one thing that dissapoints me the most about the contract extension (this time around) is that a buy-out clause has still not been inserted into the contract. Right now there is a small buy-out clause in the contract if DD were to take a job at another school - I think we should have a rather large one. Why? We deserve it. We gave Dickey complete control of the football program - let him play out his OOC games as scrimmages, and let him make comments to the media about it being "them against the world" - and that is all fine as long as he keeps winning. But I think that the University needs to be rewarded for taking the risk on Coach Dickey and sticking by him through his growing pains/the rough times if another school comes calling.
Every time they change or extend his contract I look for this clause to be inserted (a buy-out clause) and I have yet to see it. I am dissapointed that they (the BOR) had the opportunity to tweak his contract once again and add this clause and they chose not to do so. Maybe he won't agree to it, that is a possibility... but if a school wants him bad enough then they will pay that buy-out clause with no problem. Then we can use that money to bring back DeLoach (or promote Kenny Evans) as our HC.
Sorry for the long post - my vacation is almost over so I won't be able to post my Plumm style posts after next week so I have to enjoy it whole I can
←

Have to agree with you on the non-conference game part. This is what truely frustrates me about the coaching philosophy this football team has. As I said earlier, DD employs a not to lose mentality with these games, to where if we lose that's fine, just minimize the damage in the process. Other schools wouldn't even tollerate non-conference games viewed lower than conference games, they should be on the same level. Yes I know the whole arguement about conference games get you to bowl games, but as we have seen beating the bottom 20 teams year in and year out hasn't gotten this program as far it can get in perception.

Also I don't think it makes sense to extend the contract for a coach AGAIN when the bar fails to be raised year after year. I feel as those this team has gone laterally the last few years, when the bar should have been set higher. It shouldn't be just our goal to win conference and go to a bowl game anymore, the team should strive to achieve more than given past performance. I think by just extending his contract year after year, it just sends the message that we are happy about getting whooped in bowl games and OOC games and that's it's all gravy since we win conference. The bar has to be raised at some point, and that time should be now, but this contract extension isn't sending that message.

Also I guess I am in the minority on here, but I don't see the apocalypse coming once Norval Pohl steps down.

MootPoint · August 18, 2005

Also I guess I am in the minority on here, but I don't see the apocalypse coming once Norval Pohl steps down.
←

It all depends on who replaces him

GrandGreen · August 18, 2005

Oh is it? Thank you so much, I though it was whether or not DD's play calling was causing Stockholm Syndrome to break out among the fan base.
Back on topic, the I never argued whether or not recruiting was affected by DD's contract. Go back and read my posts, what I disagreed with you about was:
To which I said something to the effect of "no, we did recruit head to head against some schools and won some of those". Also lost too, we had a great JUCO qb coming in this year until Nebraska pulled him from us.
But, as you can see, I never said anything about contract length in that. Then you responded by saying:
Again, I said nothing about contract status. I just stated that your "don't think about the results, but how they where recruited by others" was a really bad way to think about recruiting performance.
He does, he calls everyone. But, if you call Adrian Peterson, and he has OU and UT banging on his door, and he is showing you no intrest at all, your time is better spent trying to find someone who is talented and has a good chance of signing with you.
Jamario is a kid that we contacted, and alot of other people contacted, but he never blew us off. In that case, you keep calling, and maybe, just maybe, you get to sign a great player.
Once again, I never said a word about contract, your getting the people who are debating with you confused.
←

Guess you got me there. Talk about getting into a debate over nothing. I guess I got confused wiith your quote stating that I don't think about the results but how they were recruited by others. I will try one last time, my example of a recruiting rating was to illustrate why that I do not think DD's contract status is a significant factor with his recruiting style. I was not bashing DD's recruiting techniques or in fact the results. I was attempting to discuss the necessity of giving out long term contracts. Hence the references to contracts which was the subject of my post despite your interpretation. DD's recruiting obviously has been successful at least in the Belt arena and I definitely am not advocating a watse of resources fighting windmills.

Edited August 19, 2005 by GrandGreen

FirefightnRick · August 18, 2005

DD's success has all been against Belt teams who have no overall advantages over NT in football budget or facilities(even with Fouts),

Hmm, not sure about that. Even though they have won 4 conference championships in a row his assistant coaches are the lowest paid in the conference. Amazingly, one of them has turned down offers from Ok State and two belt schools in the recent past to stay here. And as for the facilities, not sure about FIU or FAU but the rest of the school's football stadiums puts Fouts to shame. We are catching up with the new stuff(AC center etc), but you can only count that for the past year or so. And DD's been outperforming them 4 years running. Actually longer. We have owned ULL and New Mexico State and both programs have MUCH better facilities than us. To me, DD and Kenny Evans has smoked the competition in recruiting considering with what they have had to work with. It's been an amazing ride to see this program outperform other schools that are on our level.

Rick

PlummMeanGreen · August 19, 2005

It all depends on who replaces him
←

I keep having these haunting nightmares of a "football hating" Wally Cox-lookin' Mr. Peepers-type taking over from Norval Pohl. Jeez! I have awakened with a cold sweat in the middle of the night with this nightmare. (uh, just kiddin, folks).

Here's hoping, though, that NT doesn't take 5 giant steps backwards with our next NT Presidential hire. We cannot afford that now, especially since we are just making up for lost time with the modernization of our athletic facilities which are being built not so much as luxuries but as necessary miniumums--even our new football stadium will fit in that criteria.

I do have to think NT Board of Regent chairman Bobby Ray, a self-avowed Mean Green football enthusiast, is not going to let this particular hire get out of hand, though. The jury is still out on his board's hiring of Lee Jackson, who I personally think was hand-picked by Dr. Al Hurley.

GMG!

PS: I whole-heartedly agree with FFR and his assessment of our coaching staff and their situation. We must raise all their salaries and I hope others than collegiate smack board posters know this.

Edited August 19, 2005 by PlummMeanGreen