Will It Happen?

[emmitt01]

Given that we now see that at least some literature exists for fundraising are we moving along with this thing? I know several on this board state they have inside info are sure we will see a stadium this milennium, but what is the general consensus? Are we any closer to actually getting someone/someones to pony up the money...or are we putting on the full court press only to be rebuked?

Edited May 19, 2008 by emmitt01

[Green Mean]

Given that we now see that at least some literature exists for fundraising are we moving along with this thing? I know several on this board state they have inside info are sure we will see a stadium this milennium, but what is the general consensus? Are we any closer to actually getting someone/someones to pony up the money...or are we putting on the full court press only to be rebuked?

Well if we have only raised 6 million dollars out of about 60-75 million in the 4 or 5 years that the whole stadium thing has really been out in the open then I am going to say that it wont happen anytime soon. It kills for me to say this but I am only 25 and I have my doubts NT having a new football stadium before my day of death comes.

[UNT_playmaker]

Everything that has been said by the Athletic Dept has not been on target.

[KingDL1]

We will see a new stadium by fall 2010 count on it.

Ok now the Walmart at 380, and I35 I was mislead sorry guys it was not completely inked! I was told by I guess you may call an overly eager broker that it was inked. Still a great site for Walmart, no doubt about that. But will almost undoubtedly happen, just a bump in the road when allegiance turned over the control to the general partner. Other lease agreements have been signed, there is just about no way this thing can tank. Short of a depression.

[untcampbell]

Even with all the disappointment, it is unrealistic to say it WILL NOT happen.

Better poll is what decade.

GMG.com

[UNTflyer]

Yes, this stadium will be built. I don't know about 2010, but I think definitely by 2012.

[emmitt01]

Yes, this stadium will be built. I don't know about 2010, but I think definitely by 2012.

How nice...now this time in 2010 we can bandy about a definite date of 2014.

[foutsrouts]

I often have my doubts, but I'm still hopeful that it'll happen in the next five years. We've got to have it if we're going to raise our profile and make good things happen around here. There was an article in the Houston Chronicle the other day about how U of H and TT are competing with each other to become the next "Flagship" school in the state alongside Austin and College Station. If we are going to be mentioned in the same breath with those guys, at a minimum we have got to get the stadium, the law school, and a baseball program started ASAP. A lot to ask for in a short period of time, but I think it's possible that all three could become reality relatively soon.

[NT80]

only the law school would make any difference in the academic perception of a university much less raise a schools status....the other things mentioned will make no difference at all

and the law school if it becomes a reality is headed to the UNT Dallas campus.......so it will do nothing for the perception of the "main" campus in Denton

UNT is well behind in the race to become the next tier 1 school in Texas and the THECB has expectations for several others long before UNT

UH and Tech are near tied in several areas with other specific areas each needs to work on.....UTD is a distant third, but catching up fast

Well, perception of a University is different with a group of academias vs 18-year-old high school kids looking for a college to go to. Most perception from the former group is from Athletics. Ask any school who has won a National Championship how much their application rate goes up...and likewise their History Dept, Business Dept, and Basket Weaving suddenly becomes Ranked also. UNT's status would rise much faster as a member of the Big 12 and new 50K Stadium than with any Law School. Bank it!

[filmerj]

I would rather see a 50k stadium built an d half empty than a 30k built and half empty.

[greenminer]

I can't imagine any kid driving up 35, seeing a sparkling uranium stadium and going "OMG the business school there must be amazing." But seeing that, and a UNT-Army game in Denton on TV in our sparkling new facility just might make a kid go "What is UNT like?".

We're not arguing about academic standards. We're arguing for academic windows.

[greenminer]

Harvard

Rice

U Chicago

Duke

Northwestern

UC Davis

UC Riverside

UC San Diego

Good God, man, that's quite a list. Are we going to pretend we can be a private school, or realize that we have a public perception that needs to be rejuvinated?

There is quite a difference between riding the curtails of 200 years of Ivy League tradition and a 34.9 billion dollar endowment (Harvard) - not to mention a pretty good lineup of Men's bball teams above - versus decades of alumnus-relation apathy, administrative ineptness, and barely 60 million dollars endowed.

**edit

don't bother: Even UC-Davis has 10 times our endowment. Yeah.

Edited May 20, 2008 by greenminer

[greenminer]

UC schools are public universities

by the theory tossed up......suddenly we should all be hearing about all the quality academic offerings at Hawaii, Boise, and LSU

but the facts are......Hawaii is still a massively underfunded school in both athletics and academics......Boise still has a legacy in their area of offering mechanics classes and LSU is still a 3rd tier university according to US News

again I have heard nothing of any academics at any of those schools other than what I already knew.....or Gonzaga or Utah or any other such school

SMU has been through the death penalty and multiple conferences......and their Business School and several other of their programs would spank what LSU offers or Hawaii or Boise

anyone have proof where academics were suddenly elevated based on athletic success

Don't like to get too off topic, but I just think you're trying to piss on a road some of us have already been seeing the past 3 - 5 years (welcome to the board, btw). Why are we building this thing? To increase academic prestige? To put ourselves in a position to be the state's best academic institution, or to just plain WIN WIN WIN!!! WHOOP BCS BUTT ROFLWWFSMD L33t<<!!!! I digress: A wise man has said...

Let me try to salvage it.

I just hope people don't expect too much even if we do get a new stadium. Here are some past favorite silver bullets of mine:

* If we get out of the WAC into a more central/eastern conference all our problems will go away!

* If we get a new head coach all our problems will go away!

* If we can go to a bowl game all our problems will go away!

* If we can win a bowl game all our problems will go away!

* If we get a new athletic director all our problems will go away!

* If we get an athletics friendly BOR all our problems will go away.

* If we get some new facilities built all our problems willl go away!

* If we get an exciting new offense all our problems will go away!

You can replace "all our problems will go away!" with "the sleeping giant will awaken!" or "free prime rib will rain from the sky!", etc.

Notice any pattern there? Nothing magically fixed our problems, nothing will. In our situation we are either going to build this program with a lot of hard work and commitment, or it isn't going to happen. We have to overcome years of indifference, an apathetic culture, and being over shadowed in a huge media market. All that takes time to over come.

You're absolutely right: we can't prove it. But your point does not disprove of anything, either. The reality we face is that the administration for years used your exact logic/strategy - this "it can't be proven so why?" - to delay our development and thus ENHANCE alumni apathy.

This isn't really about academics or even specifically athletics, think on a higher level. The consistency is this: athletics is one of the few windows, bridges rather between being a student and being alumn. No one walks by my Mean Green cubicle crap with their eyes lit up and asks "Say how's the Engineering doing?" or "Didn't their percussion department just win PASIC for the 20 billionth year in a row?"...if they have, I'd like to meet them (because our percussion department rules).

Building on our athletics is enhancing the student-campus experience and giving them something to cling to when they are gone. We have hundreds of thousands of alumn within 50 miles of this incredible institution which, like robots, went through our fine academic programs and have forgotten about us. I'm kinda tired of seeing that. And you mean to sit around here and post as if building an athletic program is NOT going to help...at all? We need alumni involvement desperately, and having them sit at a Saturday football game - with other students - to see a product they can be proud of is a heck of a lot more than them sitting at home waiting to catch a glimpse of Simpson/Romo the next day.

**another edit/possible hijack

Did anyone else catch the end of the Stars game and drop their jaw at the crowd's ovation? This metroplex is desperate for an overachiever. It was hard not to like the Stars in the playoffs and appreciate what they did.

Edited May 20, 2008 by greenminer

[NT80]

I think there is no list of schools that have suddenly changed academic reputation in any reputable rankings based solely off of athletic success

I think you missed the part about the 18-year-old's opinions. Yes, we're well aware how World News would rank schools, but we're talking about perception and image increases overall. Most kids don't apply to schools because of polls and rankings, it's about locations, major, image, and the ever popular "coolness" factor and where "all my friends" are going. Ask TCU about their apps increase when they won big in football and were highly ranked a couple years ago. Ask Texas Wesleyan University in Ft. Worth what their Law School has done for their "image". Oh, didn't know they had a Law School? Most don't, nor care!

[GreenAlums]

anyone have proof where academics were suddenly elevated based on athletic success

Do you have any proof it doesn't? forgo theory, emotion and speculation. Either by increasing campus awareness for student enrollment or philanthropy the infrastructure of a university will benefit. The policy and operational infrastructure is designed and aligned by the BOR. Marketing and publicity are designed to support the core values of a university, which should be academics. Football provides a superb window for exposure and recognition. Not the only, just one of the best. If that exposure (football) doesn't positively affect academics....its not football's fault. Call it marketing dollars. I believe marketing is a well established practice for any thriving company or entity. Sorry, we aren't a land grant college. We have to run this a bit like a business.

[foutsrouts]

only the law school would make any difference in the academic perception of a university much less raise a schools status....the other things mentioned will make no difference at all

and the law school if it becomes a reality is headed to the UNT Dallas campus.......so it will do nothing for the perception of the "main" campus in Denton

UNT is well behind in the race to become the next tier 1 school in Texas and the THECB has expectations for several others long before UNT

UH and Tech are near tied in several areas with other specific areas each needs to work on.....UTD is a distant third, but catching up fast

That's ridiculous. Success in athletics can plant the seed which leads to future success in academics down the road. It's a no-brainer that athletic success can lead to alumni donations and visibility that can be difficult to obtain in any other way. No one said we would be "Tier 1" overnight, but getting your school's name pasted all over television and newspapers in a positive light sure doesn't do any harm. It's an evolutionary process not an overnight affair. Btw, it's not a given that the law school will be part of UNT-Dallas. Missing out in the last legislative session may have been a blessing in disguise.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

---George Mason and some others have reported that the number of applications for enrollment have really climbed after being very visible in the NCAA March madness. ( they can be more selective and pick better students which improves academic reputation) Athletics can be cheap advertising. Athletics also tends to bring in more donations.... The complaint here has been the lack of a size-able endowment. I'll bet their is a high correlation between athletic success and endowment size. No a wining year or two does not make the profs better but in the long run it can improve the image of the school... . [unless the athletes recruited are constantly getting in trouble]

---As I have stated in other posts, UTA and UNT were once almost identical in size. now statewide, UTA is not known very well and UNT is much better known and is also much larger.

---The list is interesting... maybe some of those have good academics, but I really have barely heard of a few of those. If a person said he had graduated from California Davis, I would not be impressed..... Stanford, yes

---Granted the first four almost everyone has heard of and consider an outstanding college. One is known for the A-bomb and the other three have had several well known athletic moments....just not recently.

---Athletics won't make a school a great academic institution but it does bring them name recognition, may allow them to be more selective in students because of more applicants, and brings in more donations to all departments.

Sometimes raw stats just don't give the entire picture... I teach stats, you just need to evaluate what you are reading. Good athletics CAN improve academic image but not always and may do nothing and in fact could harm it as could be the case at Rice if they get into trouble or come across ob TV as idiots.

[GoMeanGreen1999]

We will see a new stadium by fall 2010 count on it.

Ok now the Walmart at 380, and I35 I was mislead sorry guys it was not completely inked! I was told by I guess you may call an overly eager broker that it was inked. Still a great site for Walmart, no doubt about that. But will almost undoubtedly happen, just a bump in the road when allegiance turned over the control to the general partner. Other lease agreements have been signed, there is just about no way this thing can tank. Short of a depression.

I am fairly confident that we will get a new stadium sometime in the next 5 - 15 years, I am just not as confident that it will be sooner rather than later. We have been hearing about a new stadium now for what 3-5 years, and are just now learning there is some literature about it? I hear the President tell the students we need 30 million worth of donations to get the project started just 2 months ago...A part of me wonders if most of this literature now that is coming out isn't coming out just to appease the fans - hope I am wrong.

As for the Walmart at 380 - I just drove by that location this weekend, and though "Well KingDL1 says it is happening, so I guess it is still on schedule". I heard something that said Walmart wasn't going to build any new locations until they settled something that was in the courts - don't know if that is true or not - is the whole Razor Ranch project just not going to happen now?

[Green Mean]

checkfacts,

I agree with pretty much everything you have said but I think its really a whole package that makes a difference. I think the success of athletics increases donations throughout the board. When OU won their national championship in 2000 the donations quintupled in all aspects of the University. So when that happens, there is more money for the colleges, programs, professors, students, research etc. You cannot tell me that doesnt make a difference. With money, you have everything and the power for research and etc and thats where the true prestige of a school exists. At the same time, with the academics being top tier, you can raise lots of money through groups, companies which therefore you get lots of top students in your program that will likely become successful and thus will be apart of the university, program etc. So really, everyone on here is right to a certain extent but is collectively everybody that is to be accountable that makes a difference. There is no one right answer to it as its a machine and every part is valuable and makes an impact.

[Guest 97and03]

It is called the "Flutie Effect" and it has been studied academically, not just anecdotaly.

http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news?slug=ap-f...p&type=lgns

For George Mason University, just outside Washington, the positive effects of its unlikely Final Four appearance two years ago were wide-reaching.

In addition to increases in fundraising, attendance at games and other benefits, freshman applications increased 22 percent the year after the team made its magical run. The percentage of out-of-state freshmen jumped from 17 percent to 25 percent, and admissions inquiries rose 350 percent, said Robert Baker, director of George Mason’s Center for Sport Management who conducted a study called “The Business of Being Cinderella.”

Baker also found that SAT scores went up by 25 points in the freshman class, and retention rates as freshmen moved into their sophomore year increased more than 2 percentage points.

Edited May 20, 2008 by 97and03

[Stan R]

At this point in the poll exactly 32.31% of respondents have the correct answer.

[Quoner]

I am well aware of the Flutie Effect

unfortunately for you I am also well aware that there is no Flutie Effect no matter how large that will change the academics of UNT.......you can present all those articles you wish......the fact is that enrollment size has nothing to do with quality of a university.....and the fact is even though UNT is above the national SAT average for their admitted freshmen......UNT still has lower enrollment requirements than UT, TAMU, UT-D, and TTU

so having more applications to UNT could actually serve to LOWER the SAT of admitted freshman just as much or more than it could raise it......because UNT can be as selective as it wants with applications......but what they can't do is not allow students in that meet the admissions requirements

http://www.unt.edu/admission/

http://www.admissions.ttu.edu/freshman/req...nts/default.asp

http://www.uta.edu/admissions/freshman.php

so while UNT becomes "hip" with football you could suddenly find your self having to admit students from the top 25% of their class with a 950 SAT......do you really really want all those applications flooding in

and it will take a great deal of giving and Flutie Effect to raise an endowment from 90 million to 400 or 500 million.....and in the mean time other schools already have concrete plans to move their even higher......and they are not going to do it with the Flutie Effect

take your excel or excel viewer and look at where UNT stands compared to other schools in Texas

http://www.thecb.state.tx.us/ClosingtheGaps/UnivMeasRank.xls

these numbers are from THECB....so I don't think they have been skewed to work against UNT (that is SMUs job )

http://www.thecb.state.tx.us/ClosingtheGap..._pdf.cfm?Goal=4

look at the THECB goals for UNT......30 million a year in external research by 2020 is only 70 million away from what Tier 1 schools do today

tier 1 schools often bring in over 100 million a year in giving

there are no set numbers for tier 1 anymore as far as what a research university is.......but it is generally 100 million in research and 100 million in gifts along with a number of other factors.......UNT would need something more than the Flutie Effect to get that done.....especially since the THECB does not have Tier 1 for UNT as a goal and the south dallas campus is such an anchor

but perhaps all of you are correct and I am wrong and you can post articles about the Todge Effect as score board on me in the future......I would prefer to gamble on doing it the old fashioned way....building faculty and research and true academic standing.....VS smoke and mirrors with athletics

because in reality none of you have shown where the Flutie Effect made any real difference in academic reputation.....and UNT has yet to show me they are anywhere near ready to have a Flutie Effect in athletics

while the other method has been proven time and again

But....but.....ummm...

Sports!

[Eagle1855]

good informative posts, CheckFacts.

Honestly, I'd rather be a tier 2 university than have a great football team, though I'm not sure the two are mutually exclusive.

I also think the UNT-Dallas campus is a HUGE waste of time and resources, and I believe that ANY law school needs to be attached to the UNT-Denton campus.

Let me pose this question (since I really don't know the answer): What would be the problem with becoming part of the UT-system? I don't think we'd have to change our name (SHSU is part of the Texas State system), seems like it might benefit us in the long run since they seem to carry the most weight with the state.

[Guest 97and03]

FYI. The law school would be located in Dallas, not actually part of UNT Dallas.

I am not saying that the Flutie effeect is some type of panacea that will actually fix everything that is wrong with UNT. I just know that the right type of athletic success can have a positive impact.

As for admissions standards, they have gone up significanly over the last several years. A public university like UNT needs to admit students. Just ask Tech. They have higher admission standards on paper, but opened the gates up significantly for Fall 2007 since they needed to admit more students. As a result, their average SAT scores went down.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

it may not be 100% given that the law school will go to the UNT Dallas fiasco but on page 12 of this UNT plan it sure says it will http://www.unt.edu/unt-dallas/UNTAcademicPlan_Web.pdf

#2 the point was not first made that a bunch of 18yos would get excited over winning in football the point was made that winning in football would suddenly boost academic rankings....and that is 100% false

this thread represents a great deal of the poor thinking that infest this forum......size of a university says nothing about how good a university is academically.....while winning can increase applications and allow for more selective choice in students......it would take probably a decade or more of this to even have a small impact on overall quality of enrollment and academic reputation.....and even then only slightly....nothing to suddenly have business programs ranked in Business Week.....nothing to get a Phi Betta Kappa chapter......nothing to join the AAU....maybe a bump from tier 4 to tier 3 in US News......and even then it would take 15-20 years of more to make that happen......probably longer than any school could keep that success together and channel it into more selective admissions and higher giving

while UNT may have grown faster than UTA in recent history.......they are still both the same academically in nearly every way......so being bigger has done nothing.....and even with out football UTA is back growing again

the fact some would not be impressed with a UC Davis degree again speaks volumes about what is wrong on this forum

http://www.nacubo.org/Images/All%20Institu..._2007%20NES.pdf

I know UNT has a silent plan to raise 60 million for a football stadium.....the problem is this does not sit well with faculty who know 60 million is nearly 2/3rds on UNTs present endowment.....and they know that football will get more applications......but do nothing to raise the stature as a research university

in theory UNT was also a Carnegie Foundation tier 1 or tier 2 school......unfortunately the Carnegie Foundation has now changed their rankings formula to the point where it is about useless to judge the academic offerings of school....and the only reason UNT was high in the past is because of the numbers of masters and PhDs offered and awarded.....this is about the only category where UNT can compare to the schools it feels it competes with academically.....unfortunately that is only a SMALL part of what people talk about when they want to be "tier1"

much more of it has to do with externally funded research, faculty productivity, endowed chairs and professorships, endowment, scholarly publications and things of that nature.....football will do nothing for any of that

to be a nationally respected research (tier1) university you have to do a great deal more than have football and win.......to fool some 18yos into thinking you compete academically on the same level as some other schools......that is a different story......but again all you are doing with that plan is fooling them and yourself.....no one else

this forum should get together and decide what you want.....do you want to be a nationally respected academic institution with tier 1 type dollar amounts in research ect.

or do you want to project that image to 18 yos with athletics while watching schools you feel are your peers leave you further behind academically........you can do both......or you can do only one.....but only one of those choices will actually make you the university you want to be......the other choice will only make you and a bunch of 18yos think that

I repeat... I know nothing of UC-Davis... they may be another "Harvard of the West" as far as I know (nickname for Stanford, actually makes sense if you know the history of its founding, know several grads).... UC-D just isn't a well known name as is Rice, Stanford, Duke or many others. [ partially well known because of athletics ] I do teach in college, my wife teaches in a private school that sends a lot of students to very tough academic universities including Ivy League colleges. I repeat.. I have heard of it... (never lived on West-Coast) but that is about it.. it could be a Mickey Mouse place as far as I know.

this forum should get together and decide what you want ... ahh... we don't get to make the decisions ... get real.!! but we can discuss and maybe have a very small amount of influence with some. (ie. public opinion) where do you suggest we get together... IHOP?

this thread represents a great deal of the poor thinking that infest this forum......size of a university says nothing about how good a university is academically.....while winning can increase applications and allow for more selective choice in students......it would take probably a decade or more of this to even have a small impact on overall quality of enrollment and academic reputation --- yep we are dumber than goats but we can spell etc..... I and the rest here always thought it was size that mattered...lol... and that Rice is an awful college because it is so small..

PS: I did not go to college so I could claim I went where-ever (and owe a fortune in student loans) ... but to get an education and to be able to make a living... You are not talking to a country bumpkin that knows nothing about education ... one of my sons will finish law school this year and recently represented the law schools in the State of Texas at a national competition in LA. [Harvard did not get there, their students were eliminated at the regional round...LOL ...he defeated several Ivy league grads in his own law school to even get to the regional competition] My other son (UNT- 2000) owns a patent or two, both are currently computer engineers. Daughter (UNT-03) works for a computer networking company.

An education is more about what YOU LEARN and what YOU CAN DO than where you go or what crazy ranking some Eastern magazine wants to assign to your college. .........Go Mean Green...continue to improve in athletics and academics. .... both of which CAN improve the school's reputation....plus name recognition does help get people in getting employment. ... and even more so when outside your region. ( I suppose people in Calf. know of UC-Davis pretty well, people here don't )

.

Edited May 20, 2008 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66