Follow The Lead

unt88 · January 4, 2007

In a previous posting someone had mentioned getting the community behind the University like Boise did. I was looking at the past few seasons for Boise and found that after they left the Big West to go to the WAC they have not scheduled a top ten team to play. In fact they have not scheduled a team they new they had no chance against.

Why doesn't TD follow the lead..what do I mean?...dump your heart and soul into the Mean Green Nation (Denton). Instead of playing these so called money games (ass whippings) put the teams that are more for the taking on the schedule. If you go back and look at the Boise scheduling for the last 6 years there is not a single team that sticks out. In fact the best team I can see is Georgia in 2005 when the were ranked 13 in the nation. Boise takes it shots and big schools but they are just at the bottom of the Big Ten and Pac Ten and then they take out the top of the Mountain West. They also have scheduled the (middle at the time) of the ACC and SEC. Never have they played a team at the top of the big conferences and look where they are today........I now hein sight is 20-20 but we have an opportunity we have a new HC.

My proposal is TD look at scheduling the bottom of the big ten, big 12, and the middle of c-usa. Hell schedule up some MAC games. Rather than setting up hospital bowls like OU, Texas, and Arkansas. If TD takes as much pride in NT as he did with SL he will get the support from us and the community, with support comes money, there for we do not need the money games. JUST LIKE BOISE DID.

Since leaving the Big West, Boise is an amazing 66-11 over all (including bowl games) not a sinlge losing season. IN FRIGGIN BOISE IDAHO. Now what do you think the Mean Green Nation would do with that?

Lets get this Dodge Ball going............

p.s. sorry for the long winded post, I was thinking which doesn't happen very often......

SilverEagle · January 4, 2007

RV is the one who schedules the games....not TD.

January 4, 2007

It is more likely that top tier teams no longer schedule Boise State... not the other way around. Similar to top tier teams rarely play each other, unless it is a conference game or a bowl.

meangreenacct · January 4, 2007

It would be nice if we could only schedule teams we realistically believe we can beat year in and year iut (we'd have to know that since scheduling is done in advance), but I don't believe that's an economic reality for us. I think as of right now a money game each year is probably necessary for the financial viability of our program. The fact that many of our game for the next few years are already scheduled causes a few more problems with that scenario. All in all though, I think the scheduling that last few years has been vastly improved, as we are usually only scheduling one game that I would percieve to be of the body-bad variety. It would be nice to be able to get all of Denton (all of Dallas would be even better) behind the Mean Green, whether that can be done remains to be seen, but I believe hiring Todd Dodge is a step in that direction...

Craig

unt88 · January 4, 2007

It is more likely that top tier teams no longer schedule Boise State... not the other way around. Similar to top tier teams rarely play each other, unless it is a conference game or a bowl.

Their scheduling goes back to when they were mediocre.

"SilverEagle Posted Today, 02:48 PM

RV is the one who schedules the games....not TD. "

TD will have some say in the scheduling but you are right.

mad dog · January 4, 2007

"SilverEagle Posted Today, 02:48 PM
RV is the one who schedules the games....not TD. "
TD will have some say in the scheduling but you are right.

If that is indeed true, remember that games are scheduled years in advance. Next year's schedule is set. Most of the year after that is scheduled as well. We are all lucky that Rick V started to cut back on these games a while ago, so now we are seeing more realistic schedules.

GreenEddieNT · January 4, 2007

In a previous posting someone had mentioned getting the community behind the University like Boise did. I was looking at the past few seasons for Boise and found that after they left the Big West to go to the WAC they have not scheduled a top ten team to play. In fact they have not scheduled a team they new they had no chance against.
Why doesn't TD follow the lead..what do I mean?...dump your heart and soul into the Mean Green Nation (Denton). Instead of playing these so called money games (ass whippings) put the teams that are more for the taking on the schedule. If you go back and look at the Boise scheduling for the last 6 years there is not a single team that sticks out. In fact the best team I can see is Georgia in 2005 when the were ranked 13 in the nation. Boise takes it shots and big schools but they are just at the bottom of the Big Ten and Pac Ten and then they take out the top of the Mountain West. They also have scheduled the (middle at the time) of the ACC and SEC. Never have they played a team at the top of the big conferences and look where they are today........I now hein sight is 20-20 but we have an opportunity we have a new HC.
My proposal is TD look at scheduling the bottom of the big ten, big 12, and the middle of c-usa. Hell schedule up some MAC games. Rather than setting up hospital bowls like OU, Texas, and Arkansas. If TD takes as much pride in NT as he did with SL he will get the support from us and the community, with support comes money, there for we do not need the money games. JUST LIKE BOISE DID.
Since leaving the Big West, Boise is an amazing 66-11 over all (including bowl games) not a sinlge losing season. IN FRIGGIN BOISE IDAHO. Now what do you think the Mean Green Nation would do with that?
Lets get this Dodge Ball going............
p.s. sorry for the long winded post, I was thinking which doesn't happen very often......

The reason schools like UTEP or Boise State can schedule light and still draw well is that they've got the best of both worlds. They're located in well populated urban areas but they are the top dog in those areas because there are no pro teams or BCS schools nearby or positioned to steal their thunder. For that reason they get the lions share of the local media coverage and the local sports fans have no choice but to support them with their presence and with their money. You've got anywhere from 500K to 800K people in those areas and their choices for entertainment are pretty much limited to going to see the local team play or going to the movies. It is a completely alien environment to what the situation is for UNT which has to compete not only with the other DFW area schools but also with the Big-12 and then on top of that with professional sports franchises. Then you've got the fact that UNT is in the Sun Belt and the facilities are average at best. That's why UNT does the money games...all Sun Belt schools do and 90% of the non-bcs schools.

Edited January 4, 2007 by GreenEddieNT

unt88 · January 4, 2007

This is interesting...

STARKVILLE, Miss.--College athletic directors are walking a tightrope between fan pressure and financial solvency more and more these days--and just how well they perform the balancing act may determine their program's overall success.

Weeknight games? TV games? Guarantee games? Improving mid-major conference opponents? Politics? Strength of schedule? Contract buyouts? Bowl eligibility?

"Scheduling a college football game has more twists and turns than the average fan imagines," says Robert Zullo, a Mississippi State University sport administration expert who has thoroughly researched the subject.

"Joe Fan would love for Southern Cal to play non-conference games against Miami, Virginia Tech and Georgia in the same season, but doesn't understand why that's not possible," the assistant professor adds. "That same type of fan is irate when West Virginia plays Division I-AA Wofford."

Zullo's study, "The Right Moves," might aptly be subtitled "College Football Scheduling 101: The Art of Scheduling in I-A Football." The report recently appeared in Athletic Management, a publication read by athletic directors around the country.

A former employee of athletic departments at Georgia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, and Virginia Military Institute, Zullo has focused his research on intercollegiate athletics. The kinesiology department's sport administration program in which he teaches is a part of MSU's College of Education.

Among other things, Zullo's research examines the current fair-market value for guarantee games--whereby a host school assures its opponent a certain sum of money for being the visitor, instead of offering a home-and-home series. Because amounts in today's market range from $150,000 to nearly $700,000 for a single game, neutral game-site locations are more frequently explored, he discovered.

"Guarantees fluctuate based on sound negotiations," says Zullo, noting that "visitors"--usually from mid-major conference or smaller schools--tend to benefit from guaranteed paychecks, potential television exposure and the chance to get national attention by pulling off a big upset.

Athletic directors pursuing post-season bowl bids and national rankings must weigh the pros and cons of scheduling strong non-conference opponents. On one had, a win can bolster prestige, but there's the risk of a loss. On the other, "scheduling down" to weaker I-A or I-AA opponents usually provides a win, but also may turn off fans and diminish credibility.

"Countless factors must be examined when deciding on whether or not to agree to a football series," observes Frank Crumley, senior associate athletic director for the University of Georgia. "Even then, a deal may fall through at the 12th hour."

To complicate matters, decisions must be made several years in advance of play; and backing out of a game later may be expensive, since most contracts contain six-figure escalating "buyout" clauses.

As Zullo points out, there is only one certainty: "You can't please everyone.

"Those in charge of the budget are looking at games that best generate revenue," he continues. "The public relations folks want a schedule that gets the team on national television. Alumni relations is asking for games at locations with large alumni bases. Faculty call for a schedule that does not negatively impact the focus on academics.

"And your coach is saying, 'Wait a minute, don't I control the schedule?'"

On top of all those factors, Zullo notes how the scheduling climate currently is undergoing a whirlwind of changes that athletic administrators need to consider.

"Television's influence continues to grow," he says. "Playing non-Saturday games may result in negative feedback from the local community, and fans that have to work the next day.

"New factors to consider include the NCAA's (National Collegiate Athletic Association) recent approval of a 12th game starting with the 2006 season," he adds. "And, in some areas, state politicians have gotten involved in a school's football schedule."

Zullo maintains that, at the heart of all these choices and "calculated strategies," athletic administrators must focus on the central question: What are our goals and how will we reach those objectives?

"This will be very different for Michigan than for Baylor, for example, but the factors are the same for everyone," he says.

To sort through the "whirlwind of changes" in today's scheduling climate, Zullo is urging collegiate athletic directors to form advisory committees, seek information from other schools, welcome controlled input from fans and alumni, maintain good relations with public officials and the media, and explain decisions made in the "best interest" of the school.

"The old days of football scheduling have passed and athletic directors and senior administrators must evolve with the times," Zullo contends. "Don't worry about pleasing everyone, but do worry about creating the balance that leads to overall success for the athletic department and the school collectively."

PerryG2480 · January 4, 2007

Keep in mind that when we scheduled teams like La. Tech, Tulsa, Akron, SMU, Arizona, Air Force, etc...we were going to bowl games and most of those teams were cellar dwellers or mediocre at best.

GrandGreen · January 4, 2007

Economics anyone? What is going to replace the revenue gained through playing money games? I actually think one or two money games makes sense, these games not only brings in money, but gives exposure to the team, provides a measuring stick for your program, and helps in recruiting. NT already by vitrue of being in the Belt plays one of the easiest schedules in the nation. There is no way for NT in the Belt and with Fout field to come close to replacing money generated by "money" games with traditional home and away contracts or by scheduling 1aa clubs.

trud1966 · January 4, 2007

It would be nice if we could only schedule teams we realistically believe we can beat year in and year iut (we'd have to know that since scheduling is done in advance), but I don't believe that's an economic reality for us. I think as of right now a money game each year is probably necessary for the financial viability of our program. The fact that many of our game for the next few years are already scheduled causes a few more problems with that scenario. All in all though, I think the scheduling that last few years has been vastly improved, as we are usually only scheduling one game that I would percieve to be of the body-bad variety. It would be nice to be able to get all of Denton (all of Dallas would be even better) behind the Mean Green, whether that can be done remains to be seen, but I believe hiring Todd Dodge is a step in that direction...
Craig

Exactly... Many people need to realize that it's not so much the UNT football team that is broken. If the coaching isnt there, the entire program suffers. Without coaching, the team plays poorly, we dont get the recruiting we'd always want, which hurts attendence/ticket sales. After a period of time, a couple of years, the operating budgets will suffer and unfortunately the only way to generate dollars is to schedule a couple games where someone like UT uses us as a warm up game. So unfortunately, in order to avoid playing those types of teams for the gate money, we're going to have to beat them with what we have right now. Doing that will boost ticket/booster/merchandise/whatever to the point where we wont need blood money from bigger schools. I would love for us to schedule someone smaller like a Division I-AA school as OUR home opener to help kick things off. Right now we have to climb ourselves out of the hole we've already dug.

Edited January 4, 2007 by trud1966

GreenEddieNT · January 4, 2007

Economics anyone? What is going to replace the revenue gained through playing money games? I actually think one or two money games makes sense, these games not only brings in money, but gives exposure to the team, provides a measuring stick for your program, and helps in recruiting. NT already by vitrue of being in the Belt plays one of the easiest schedules in the nation. There is no way for NT in the Belt and with Fout field to come close to replacing money generated by "money" games with traditional home and away contracts or by scheduling 1aa clubs.

I found something interesting, Boise State actually played 6 bowl teams this year(Oregon State, Utah, Hawaii, Nevada, Jose State, and OKlahoma) and beat all of them. UNT played 4 bowl teams(Texas, Tulsa, MTSU, and Troy) and lost to all of them.

Green Mean · January 4, 2007

I think playing schools like Texas, Oklahoma, LSU and etc are very important for a program thats in our situation. Boise State historically has been a very sucessful fb program even dating back to division 1aa. To generate backing from all of Denton/Dallas is asking a lot because this is big 12 country all throughout the state and not to far from UNT is SMU and TCU...which both of them on the whole have better programs than NT. These money games are important because I think that we do get some kind of national exposure even if we lose 56-7 or 65-0 etc. Maybe that can be motivation to the team playing better and with more of a heart....we need to play our arses off against these schools and not to get blown out this much. No one is expecting us beating these teams....not even the coach I bet. However I dont think its out of the possibility that we can atleast somewhat compete with them. Instead losing 56-7.....doesnt 38-14 or 28-10 sound better? It gives us a barometer of how bad or good our team is and we get exposure and most importantly we get a check from them that will go toward funding things in the program. Its almost a win win situation if you ask me. Troy almost beat FSU this season, they did beat Mizzou a few years back. I think we need to set the bar high right now because thats the only way we are going to get out of the rut we are in right now. Once we get into lets say the WAC, MWC or CUSA then we can think like BSU I think. Remember we are lucky to get 15k people in the seats for a game at Fouts....thats not going to generate money so where will it come from?

FirefightnRick · January 4, 2007

I posted the suggestion of Denton getting behind the Mean Green as the City of Boise got behind their Broncos. They did this so that they could STOP having to schedule money games. As GrandGreen posted, it's economics. But as we have seen, simply whoring out your football team for canned hunt games doesn't HAVE to be the only way. And the fact that 5 years ago RV was able to schedule only one money game for the '06 season to try and help us out tells me that NT is trying to schedule as smartly as possible. When RV got here back in '01 he stated this was one of his biggest concerns and he came through on that. From here on I expect to see us to continue to see our schedules favor our goals.

RIck

Quoner · January 4, 2007

They played Georgia a few years ago - got all hyped for their chance to make a statement between the hedges and then I think crapped the bed in that game and gave up 55 points.

unt88 · January 4, 2007

They played Georgia a few years ago - got all hyped for their chance to make a statement between the hedges and then I think crapped the bed in that game and gave up 55 points.

it was last year and the score was 48-13 in athens. Georgia ended up being a top ten last year ranked 10th I think.

Edited January 4, 2007 by unt88

Quoner · January 4, 2007

it was last year and the score was 48-13 in athens. Georgia ended up being a top ten last year ranked 5th I think.

Thanks for the correction

LongJim · January 5, 2007

I posted the suggestion of Denton getting behind the Mean Green as the City of Boise got behind their Broncos.
RIck

I agree with this, and I know you're referring to the City of Denton picking up the ball and running with it, but for UNT's part, I believe that UNT needs to also expand the focus to the corridors of both corridors of I35--IE: Involve the bedroom communities along the way from Denton to north Dallas, and I35W all the way to north FW. (Wow, that's a terrible sentence right there...)

There is no reason I should have to pass a billboard every morning on my way to work extolling the virtues of LSU, when it could just as easily be a UNT billboard. All of Denton County, Wise County, Collin...those should all be MG Territory. Nobody cares about SMU, so why not Plano and Richardson as well? Point is, UNT needs to be NORTH TEXAS' team--not just Denton's.

Communities such as the "Speedway Cities" of Justin, Rhome, Haslet, North and Southlake, Argyle, Lake Dallas/Highland Village/Lewisville, "Far North" FW...those are all areas that should be targeted, IMO. Hell, even McKinney and Decatur down 380 need coverage--Collin county has over 700K, and Wise county is growing at a rate twice the state average. UNT needs (IMO) to say "This is our turf." and treat it as such.

Having said that, I'm sure the AD's "people" are working on stuff that will probably be in a similar direction, so this is an exciting time, for sure.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · January 5, 2007

In a previous posting someone had mentioned getting the community behind the University like Boise did. I was looking at the past few seasons for Boise and found that after they left the Big West to go to the WAC they have not scheduled a top ten team to play. In fact they have not scheduled a team they new they had no chance against.

88,

This is a point I've made several times in the past. All it did was cause RV's board spy to accuse me of being Kenny Evans. Of course, in offering a $1,000 per accuser wager on whether or not I was Kenny Evans, the spy stopped shadowing my posts.

Rather than Boise, I've always used Kansas State as my example of a team that rebuilt by scheduling winnable games. But, the Boise comparison is also good. It doesn't happen overnight. I took Bill Snyder three season to produce his first winning squad, five years to begin to win consistently.

He began by scheduling I-AAs from all over - Indiana State, Northern Iowa, Western Kentucky, Montana, Idaho State. After K-State began to win those, he moved on to scheduling more mid-majors - Cinncinati, Arkon, Ohio, Bowling Green, etc. By 2000, he was schduling the likes of Iowa, USC, and Cal - and beating them. In 2001 and 2002, K-State beat Southern Cal.

Snyder grew the program from consecutive zero win seasons in 1987 and 1988 to a team that consistently won bowl games as well as Big 12 North Division titles. He ultimately delivered a Big 12 title. What he did works. He's proved it. Boise State has now proved it. We started to go down the path the past couple of years with home and homes with Tulsa and playing Akron this season. We need those games along with at least one I-AA game to open the season winning.

When you schedule the likes of Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas, etc. to begin a season, to don't give your squad a chance to develop what they've practiced in the fall and spring. You simply send them out to be pulverized and wait for the SBC schedule to start before you can really compete with what you practice. It's a stupid way to do things, but one we're apparently willing to continue.

KSU and Boise got good because they were able to taste success from game one of each season. The spring and fall practices meant something. Victories were the reward for the off-season work. It built winning mindsets that allowed both programs to climb the ladder.

Eagle1855 · January 5, 2007

KSU and Boise got good because they were able to taste success from game one of each season. The spring and fall practices meant something. Victories were the reward for the off-season work. It built winning mindsets that allowed both programs to climb the ladder.

this is also what A&M did with their basketball schedules the first couple years under Gillespie...

greenminer · January 5, 2007

They played Georgia a few years ago - got all hyped for their chance to make a statement between the hedges and then I think crapped the bed in that game and gave up 55 points.

it was last year and the score was 48-13 in athens. Georgia ended up being a top ten last year ranked 10th I think.

I was just thinking of that. What was Georgia's ranking when the two played?

-gm

Quoner · January 5, 2007

I was just thinking of that. What was Georgia's ranking when the two played?
-gm

BSU was #18 and Georgia was #13. The dogs were favored by 7 at home.

Not all that different from OU this year. Georgia finished 10-3 and ranked #10.

Many more mid-major victories are needed before anything is proved. OU carried the banner for a crappy, crappy, craptacular Big 12 this season. (and yes, they would all still have waxed us, Playmaker - even the Aggies.)

Quoner · January 5, 2007

88,
This is a point I've made several times in the past. All it did was cause RV's board spy to accuse me of being Kenny Evans. Of course, in offering a $1,000 per accuser wager on whether or not I was Kenny Evans, the spy stopped shadowing my posts.

Yeah, whatever happened to that guy? I've seen him at the games but he hasn't been around here for a bit...

The Fake Lonnie Finch · January 5, 2007

this is also what A&M did with their basketball schedules the first couple years under Gillespie...

Good point. A&M stole that guy. Why he wasn't hired by a more traditional basketball school before A&M came calling was always a mystery to me.

greenminer · January 6, 2007

Good point. A&M stole that guy. Why he wasn't hired by a more traditional basketball school before A&M came calling was always a mystery to me.

You must be asking why no one else gave him a call at the same time A&M recruited him. Surely it's not a mystery to you that no one came calling after his first 6-24 season.

To the Aggies credit, they courted him in all the right ways: hung with him from mid-season on with meetings and several phone calls. They probably had a bit of luck on their side too as there were not that many openings that year; that's to the best of my memory.

It's an ongoing joke in Minerland that our coaches are taking over the Big-12 one at a time. only 10 more to go, right?

-gm

Edited January 6, 2007 by greenminer