Todd Dodge Dancing With The Stars

greenjoe · April 18, 2007

Todd Dodge spoke to my Kiwanis Club this morning (Wed.). He was there along with Hank and both did us proud. I'm not sure we could ask for better ambassadors for our University.

As far as dancing, I aked Coack Dodge about the helmets. He answered that they were green right now. So I tried harder. I asked what the helmets wuld look like when we open against the Sooners. He said the design was still in the works. Hank added that they needed to save something for "Christmas morning." So I guess we drive to Norman and find out.

He spoke about the strengths of the defense and how the offense is coming along. Spoke highly of JaMario and stated he put high emphasis on the kicking game. He asked himself how to put pressure on a kicker in practice ? He says they run drills and then call for a field goal. Players quickly set up for a FG and if the kick is good, practice is over. If not, it's not.

I'm looking foward to the scrimmage at 3 on Sunday.

Join the Mean Green Club

Buy Season Tickets

GO MEAN GREEN

Mad Hatter · April 18, 2007

Did Dickey do that kind of thing before?

greenminer · April 18, 2007

Did Dickey do that kind of thing before?

You mean run a practice?

RamoneArchie · April 18, 2007

Actually it's pretty common to put pressure on the kicker in that way. It's been done everywhere I have played and coached. I even use to use it with free throws when I coached basketball. That's probably the closet to an actual pressure situation you could put the kicker in.

UNTLifer · April 18, 2007

You mean run a practice?

Now that made me laugh.

DeepGreen · April 18, 2007

You mean run a practice?

Speak to various community organizations?

Mad Hatter · April 18, 2007

Sorry for the confusion - I meant did Dickey used to speak at organizations like that in Denton? If so, I guess I just never heard about it.

emmitt01 · April 18, 2007

Sorry for the confusion - I meant did Dickey used to speak at organizations like that in Denton? If so, I guess I just never heard about it.

He would have spoken to community organizations but most of them have a problem with being called m'fers.

UNTLifer · April 18, 2007

He would have spoken to community organizations but most of them have a problem with being called m'fers.

That plus the constantly picking his teeth and belching was annoying.

NT80 · April 18, 2007

I asked what the helmets wuld look like when we open against the Sooners. He said the design was still in the works.

Good; maybe they have been reading GMG.com and are considering scrapping the white helmets with North Texas on them. I'm not so much against the white helmets as it's time to take the "North Texas" logo off it. We've grown up.

Any new stadium tidbits (for Plumm)?

MeanGreengdub · April 19, 2007

I don't understand why they are trying to hide the new design? What's the big deal? Ya, we all want one so why not show us what it is? Of course, if it's not done then that's one thing but if it is, show us the money!

MeanGreen61 · April 19, 2007

I don't understand why they are trying to hide the new design? What's the big deal? Ya, we all want one so why not show us what it is? Of course, if it's not done then that's one thing but if it is, show us the money!

Patience. We'll find out in due time.

Bryan316 · April 19, 2007

I don't understand why they are trying to hide the new design? What's the big deal? Ya, we all want one so why not show us what it is? Of course, if it's not done then that's one thing but if it is, show us the money!

What 61 said. What goes over better and gets more of a media draw, everyone leaking what they look like to whoever that asks, or an organized debut? The new Chargers uniforms were a solid in-house secret until a header/banner was accidently uploaded to one site. A uniform/stadium plan unveiling at the Athletic Center would draw a lot more people than various leaked images and descriptions.

PlummMeanGreen · April 19, 2007

Good; maybe they have been reading GMG.com and are considering scrapping the white helmets with North Texas on them. I'm not so much against the white helmets as it's time to take the "North Texas" logo off it. We've grown up.
Any new stadium tidbits (for Plumm)?

Jeff, as far as I'm concerned, new stadium tidbits are something they can keep under the radar until they come to "The Day" that they have "The Press Conference" that many of us have been waiting for most of our adult lives.

New helmet? I think maybe the prime reason they are not announcing what the new helmet is going to look like is because they (themselves) don't know what the new helmet is going to look like at this point in time.

Any new UNT helmet with any semblance of words from a thousand different font choices to choose from or any kind of "N T " letter cofigurations we already know from this message board will (most likely) never be embraced by even a simple majority from this or any other UNT-oriented forum; BTW, with this forum, ie, GoMeanGreen.com being a pretty fair microcosm of what long time Mean Green fans really do like or do not like and with such opinions from many of its posters to what extent (minimal or record-breaking numbers) they will purchase such new-look UNT gear. What our choosers chose for all of us to purchase in record-numbers really needs to be tested as to see if "it will really play well in Mean Green Country at all" in other words.

Still amazes many.................how so many of those of us who have spent a small fortune for Mean Green gear the last few decades are (apparently) not smart enough with our UNT degrees to suggest to an elite group of mostly non-UNT types who get paid some pretty nice state of Texas assisted living$ and are the ones who are our self-proclaimed "UNT experts" ; anyway what they would be the ones that choose what our latest shade of green will be as well as our newest logos, brandings or designs..............

.................then........... what they truly gamble on with their own color/logo choices what our fairly impressive and humongous constituency, ie, NT students, NT Exes and MG fans would (in fact) purchase in large numbers from those retailers who dare/care enough to carry UNT gear/products (which I'm sure which many of those same retailers notice seems to change a bit too often to suit their own retailing purpo$e$). :huh:

Edited April 19, 2007 by PlummMeanGreen

eppy4life · April 19, 2007

Now that made me laugh.

And that made me laugh.

trud1966 · April 19, 2007

Jeff, as far as I'm concerned, new stadium tidbits are something they can keep under the radar until they come to "The Day" that they have "The Press Conference" that many of us have been waiting for most of our adult lives.
New helmet? I think maybe the prime reason they are not announcing what the new helmet is going to look like is because they (themselves) don't know what the new helmet is going to look like at this point in time.
Any new UNT helmet with any semblance of words from a thousand different font choices to choose from or any kind of "N T " letter cofigurations we already know from this message board will (most likely) never be embraced by even a simple majority from this or any other UNT-oriented forum; BTW, with this forum, ie, GoMeanGreen.com being a pretty fair microcosm of what long time Mean Green fans really do like or do not like and with such opinions from many of its posters to what extent (minimal or record-breaking numbers) they will purchase such new-look UNT gear. What our choosers chose for all of us to purchase in record-numbers really needs to be tested as to see if "it will really play well in Mean Green Country at all" in other words.
Still amazes many.................how so many of those of us who have spent a small fortune for Mean Green gear the last few decades are (apparently) not smart enough with our UNT degrees to suggest to an elite group of mostly non-UNT types who get paid some pretty nice state of Texas assisted living$ and are the ones who are our self-proclaimed "UNT experts" ; anyway what they would be the ones that choose what our latest shade of green will be as well as our newest logos, brandings or designs..............
.................then........... what they truly gamble on with their own color/logo choices what our fairly impressive and humongous constituency, ie, NT students, NT Exes and MG fans would (in fact) purchase in large numbers from those retailers who dare/care enough to carry UNT gear/products (which I'm sure which many of those same retailers notice seems to change a bit too often to suit their own retailing purpo$e$).

I'll always be one of those up in arms about the helmet designs, branding, insignia, consistancy of colors, ad-infinitm. We've all gone over this 4000 times, agreed to disagee, etc etc etc. I do have my personal preferences like others on here. I, like countless others cant stand the current helmets. The thing that still bothers me about UNT graphics are not the designs themselves, but the decisions on what and where they they are placed. I know I dont have all the criteria, but on the surface, the decisions that are made about graphics seem to be coming from someone that knows very little about graphics, and doesnt realize the full impact they have. If you dont work in graphics or dont understand them, get out of the way. Many people feel that "art" is too simple of a thing to get upset about. Case in point? My GOD, look at this board! The opionions are all over the place. UNT's decisions regarding graphics over the course of 10-15 years, in my opionion have been nothing short of a disaster. The whole campaign is now seems to be a huge friggin mess. To me it's evident that whoever was the controlling factor in this really didnt take it to heart, and took "art" and "impact" for granted.

But, regardless of the whatever the FINAL DESIGN is (if we EVER get there) I hope and PRAY UNT and the AD have certainly learned a lesson out of all of this. Any of you who work in business and need to come up with a marketing idea, always remeber how UNT screwed this up. Put careful thought behind the decision before you go to print and scatter it all over the metroplex. Never take art for granted, it's a powerful force.

As for the stadium, I gotta say this. I work in architecture, and honestly we dont do projects on that type of magnitude such as a stadium. But unless somone else can add to this, basically all I understand UNT to have, at this point, is a site, maybe some preliminary ideas and a little bit of money. Preliminary ideas would indicate we've pretty much narrowed down the architect that is going to prepare construction documents. But most often, the process is going to go something to like this:

1. Project of this magnitude will most usually require formal approval from both city council and planning and zoning. Usually to the submittal process for this will require the Civil Engineering drawings (Site, Drainage, Erosion Control, Grading, Utilities, Traffic Studies, etc.) to be 100% complete. The drawings for something like this would take no less than 2-3 months to prepare. Also on a project such as this, they will require exterior elevations, renderings of what the FINAL design is to look like. And if this had been done already, we'd all know about it. UNT can keep secrets, but the City of Denton will leak the story.

2. The City Council and Planning and Zoning approval will always take a MINIMUM of 8-10 weeks. Basically, your project gets put in line behind others and you wait go get put on the dockett. Now, 8-10 weeks is a cake walk IF youre submitting something like a simple retail strip shopping center. This is a 50,000 seat stadium, very close to a residential district, viewable for miles and most importantly from 35 North, where 100,000 people will pass it each day. The stadium will be one of the largest (if not the largest) projects in Denton. I got news for ya, it aint gonna be 8-10 weeks to get this through the City Council and Planning and Zoning. Denton will make comments and require changes several times leading to several re-submittals. It easily could drag out for 4-6 months in this process alone.

3. Construction Documents will have to be complete on the stadium itself including architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing. All of this can be done concurrenty while the project is going through City Council and P&Z, but its still a HUGE amount of time. Once these are complete and UNT passes through City Council and P&Z, the project will most likely be bid out to several contractors while also being submitted to Denton for constuction permits. Again this equals time.

4. Permits released, project awarded to a General Contractor = 2 months MINIMUM (I'd guess)

5. Construction begins = I'm going to guess a year easily to build this.

Bottom Line = We're almost halfway through 2007. I hope I'm wrong, but if I were a betting man, I wouldnt put money down a new stadium by 2009.

Edited April 19, 2007 by trud1966

NT80 · April 19, 2007

I'll always be one of those up in arms about the helmet designs, branding, insignia, consistancy of colors, ad-infinitm. We've all gone over this 4000 times, agreed to disagee, etc etc etc. I do have my personal preferences like others on here. I, like countless others cant stand the current helmets. The thing that still bothers me about UNT graphics are not the designs themselves, but the decisions on what and where they they are placed. I know I dont have all the criteria, but on the surface, the decisions that are made about graphics seem to be coming from someone that knows very little about graphics, and doesnt realize the full impact they have. If you dont work in graphics or dont understand them, get out of the way. Many people feel that "art" is too simple of a thing to get upset about. Case in point? My GOD, look at this board! The opionions are all over the place. UNT's decisions regarding graphics over the course of 10-15 years, in my opionion have been nothing short of a disaster. The whole campaign is now seems to be a huge friggin mess. To me it's evident that whoever was the controlling factor in this really didnt take it to heart, and took "art" and "impact" for granted.
But, regardless of the whatever the FINAL DESIGN is (if we EVER get there) I hope and PRAY UNT and the AD have certainly learned a lesson out of all of this. Any of you who work in business and need to come up with a marketing idea, always remeber how UNT screwed this up. Put careful thought behind the decision before you go to print and scatter it all over the metroplex. Never take art for granted, it's a powerful force.
As for the stadium, I gotta say this. I work in architecture, and honestly we dont do projects on that type of magnitude such as a stadium. But unless somone else can add to this, basically all I understand UNT to have, at this point, is a site, maybe some preliminary ideas and a little bit of money. Preliminary ideas would indicate we've pretty much narrowed down the architect that is going to prepare construction documents. But most often, the process is going to go something to like this:
1. Project of this magnitude will most usually require formal approval from both city council and planning and zoning. Usually to the submittal process for this will require the Civil Engineering drawings (Site, Drainage, Erosion Control, Grading, Utilities, Traffic Studies, etc.) to be 100% complete. The drawings for something like this would take no less than 2-3 months to prepare. Also on a project such as this, they will require exterior elevations, renderings of what the FINAL design is to look like. And if this had been done already, we'd all know about it. UNT can keep secrets, but the City of Denton will leak the story.
2. The City Council and Planning and Zoning approval will always take a MINIMUM of 8-10 weeks. Basically, your project gets put in line behind others and you wait go get put on the dockett. Now, 8-10 weeks is a cake walk IF youre submitting something like a simple retail strip shopping center. This is a 50,000 seat stadium, very close to a residential district, viewable for miles and most importantly from 35 North, where 100,000 will pass it each day. The stadium will be one of the largest (if not the largest) projects in Denton. I got news for ya, it aint gonna be 8-10 weeks to get this through the City Council and Planning and Zoning. Denton will make comments and require changes several times leading to several re-submittals. It easily could drag out for 4-6 months in this process alone.
3. Construction Documents will have to be complete on the stadium itself including architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing. All of this can be done concurrenty while the project is going through City Council and P&Z, but its still a HUGE amount of time. Once these are complete and UNT passes through City Council and P&Z, the project will most likely be bid out to several contractors while also being submitted to Denton for constuction permits. Again this equals time.
4. Permits released, project awarded to a General Contractor = 2 months MINIMUM (I'd guess)
5. Construction begins = I'm going to guess a year easily to build this.
Bottom Line = We're almost halfway through 2007. I hope I'm wrong, but if I were a betting man, I wouldnt put money down a new stadium by 2009.

Some interesting information. On the helmet/logo issue I agree a graphic-artist's touch is needed. What we've been pushing is name identity; what we need to start pushing is logo identity.

As for the stadium issue some of the work you detailed has been previously done. Many of the studies you suggest were done before the master plan was updated and before it could show a future stadium to be someday at that location. The golf course was also already University-owned land, thus I believe already zoned for University type buildings (classrooms, stadiums, etc.), no?

trud1966 · April 19, 2007

Some interesting information. On the helmet/logo issue I agree a graphic-artist's touch is needed. What we've been pushing is name identity; what we need to start pushing is logo identity.
As for the stadium issue some of the work you detailed has been previously done. Many of the studies you suggest were done before the master plan was updated and before it could show a future stadium to be someday at that location. The golf course was also already University-owned land, thus I believe already zoned for University type buildings (classrooms, stadiums, etc.), no?

It's hard to say...Municipalities differ from each other. I know "studies" have been done, but I dont believe formal submittals for City Council and P&Z have been completed. Reason being, we're all wondering/creating ideas on what the stadium should look like, how big it is, etc. IF this were already done, and approved, there is no question in my mind, everyone would know about it, we'd all have access to the finished drawings, and the press would be all over it. Even IF the land is currently owned, platted, zoned for this particular use, usually the city will require submittals on a formal level (city council and P&Z) so they can have a chance to object prior to permitting the project. Basically, Denton will not allow the development/permit of something of this scale simply based on the "master plan" which just basically just shows a graphic footprint of a stadium. They'll want a to a chance or several chances to throw alot of darts at it.

Edited April 19, 2007 by trud1966

UNTLifer · April 19, 2007

It's hard to say...Municipalities differ from each other. I know "studies" have been done, but I dont believe formal submittals for City Council and P&Z have been completed. Reason being, we're all wondering/creating ideas on what the stadium should look like, how big it is, etc. IF this were already done, and approved, there is no question in my mind, everyone would know about it, we'd all have access to the finished drawings, and the press would be all over it. Even IF the land is currently owned, platted, zoned for this particular use, usually the city will require submittals on a formal level (city council and P&Z) so they can have a chance to object prior to permitting the project. Basically, Denton will not allow the development/permit of something of this scale simply based on the "master plan" which just basically just shows a graphic footprint of a stadium. They'll want a to a chance or several chances to throw alot of darts at it.

Did the city require the same with the new dorms, the tennis complex, the Student Rec Center, the Chremistry Bldg, etc......? I don't ever recall this being an issue since the property being built is on university/state owned land. I also don't think the P&Z has a say in how NT develops its land.

DeepGreen · April 19, 2007

Did the city require the same with the new dorms, the tennis complex, the Student Rec Center, the Chremistry Bldg, etc......? I don't ever recall this being an issue since the property being built is on university/state owned land. I also don't think the P&Z has a say in how NT develops its land.

Not sure about the P & Z part, but the city will have to be involved in drainage, sewage, water, etc.

trud1966 · April 19, 2007

Did the city require the same with the new dorms, the tennis complex, the Student Rec Center, the Chremistry Bldg, etc......? I don't ever recall this being an issue since the property being built is on university/state owned land. I also don't think the P&Z has a say in how NT develops its land.

Again, I originally said, unless someone knows more can add to this, Im speaking from experience. I might be wrong. Most of the work I do is crappy strip retail and office warehouses. 98% of the time I'm putting these on sites that are zoned for such. Yes, you'd THINK, "well, if it's zoned retail, then you could just SIMPLY put a retail building on it". Granted, there are SOME cities that will let you do this. However, again, I'm speaking from experience that as of lately, more and more cities are now requiring you to go through a formal process. The process is in place so a developer and architect dont design something hideous, spend thousands of dollars on construction documents only to be unrolled for the very first time when applying for permit. Planning and Zoning boards arent in place to ONLY change Zoning. Again guys, not trying to create drama, just saying, if you can simply build a 50,000 seat stadium that costs several million dollars without the City of Denton wanting to run it through a public review process, well then I'm going to start doing more work in Denton. Hope I'm wrong, but I'm leary.... I will say, UNTLifer, the issue regarding it being STATE owned land is a good point, and might just make it an exemption. I honestly dont have experience in State owned or government owned land, so hopefully the rules dont apply.

Edited April 19, 2007 by trud1966

April 19, 2007

Most, if not all, of the construction plans and drawings have included the City of Denton. Further, there are usually one or two Denton residents, in addition to the officials, that sit in on the planning process.

I believe that the stadium has had all studies completed. It is a part of the master plan which was approved by the BOR in 2005. There are a set of stadium drawings in the AD's office and he has stated that the project can be completed within 18 months of turning the first dirt. That is not to say that those drawings cannot be revised, depending on the amount and source of funds. But, we should feel comfortable that if the announcement comes before February, 2008 the stadium will be built to open the 2009 season.

It was my impression that the committee responsible for the new graphics included designers. While I agree that the artwork can strongly impact marketing, there seems to be no consensus of what the logos, color, etc. of the university should look like. Short of a vote from thousands of students and alumni I don't know how we could ever get this settled.

For example, I like the output from the committee but I'm disappointed that it did not include an interlocking NT. It has served us for more than 40 years and occasionally even before that. Maybe we can get that added at some future date.

I don't like to see constant change but all universities go through periodic changes just as companies have. I accept this change but I do hope that it lasts for at least ten years.

NT80 · April 19, 2007

Again, I originally said, unless someone knows more can add to this, Im speaking from experience. I might be wrong. Most of the work I do is crappy strip retail and office warehouses. 98% of the time I'm putting these on sites that are zoned for such. Yes, you'd THINK, "well, if it's zoned retail, then you could just SIMPLY put a retail building on it". Granted, there are SOME cities that will let you do this. However, again, I'm speaking from experience that as of lately, more and more cities are now requiring you to go through a formal process. The process is in place so a developer and architect dont design something hideous, spend thousands of dollars on construction documents only to be unrolled for the very first time when applying for permit. Planning and Zoning boards arent in place to ONLY change Zoning. Again guys, not trying to create drama, just saying, if you can simply build a 50,000 seat stadium that costs several million dollars without the City of Denton wanting to run it through a public review process, well then I'm going to start doing more work in Denton. Hope I'm wrong, but I'm leary.... I will say, UNTLifer, the issue regarding it being STATE owned land is a good point, and might just make it an exemption. I honestly dont have experience in State owned or government owned land, so hopefully the rules dont apply.

Here is a link and reference to part of the studies done back when the property came back to UNT for a stadium feasibility study.....

http://untsystem.unt.edu/eaglepointcampus/...opmentstudy.htm

Stan R · April 20, 2007

This PDF shows a stadium layout. Interesting.

DallasGreen · April 20, 2007

Most, if not all, of the construction plans and drawings have included the City of Denton. Further, there are usually one or two Denton residents, in addition to the officials, that sit in on the planning process.
I believe that the stadium has had all studies completed. It is a part of the master plan which was approved by the BOR in 2005. There are a set of stadium drawings in the AD's office and he has stated that the project can be completed within 18 months of turning the first dirt. That is not to say that those drawings cannot be revised, depending on the amount and source of funds. But, we should feel comfortable that if the announcement comes before February, 2008 the stadium will be built to open the 2009 season.
It was my impression that the committee responsible for the new graphics included designers. While I agree that the artwork can strongly impact marketing, there seems to be no consensus of what the logos, color, etc. of the university should look like. Short of a vote from thousands of students and alumni I don't know how we could ever get this settled.
For example, I like the output from the committee but I'm disappointed that it did not include an interlocking NT. It has served us for more than 40 years and occasionally even before that. Maybe we can get that added at some future date.
What do you see as the odds of this stadium happening in my lifetime at now age 60? If the A.D. still refuses a Bond issue or student fee increase I see it as 25 to 1 AGAINST it happening.
At age 60 what do you see as the odds of this being built in my lifetime? From what I see now and the refusal of the AD to use a bond issue--I guess 25 to 1 AGAINST.
I don't like to see constant change but all universities go through periodic changes just as companies have. I accept this change but I do hope that it lasts for at least ten years.

Edited April 20, 2007 by DallasGreen