Will It Happen?

[TIgreen01]

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.

Whoever started in with this "impress 18 year olds" line of arguing for the stadium is doing everyone a disservice. Yes, we want to impress upon the general population that UNT is something that is worth being associated with...but to limit it to 18 year olds opens the door for skeptics like CheckFacts to blast in with this 'pet project' crap. GreenMean is right...we need the machine (academics + student life) working completely to get where we all want to go. Anyone who can't see that "can't see the forest for the trees."

[Mean Green 93-98]

And in an interesting and ironic twist . . . a stadium thread is highjacked into an academic thread!

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

UNTs average SAT also went down in 2007....as did a number of other schools

http://media.www.ntdaily.com/media/storage...s-2953080.shtml

SAT scores for NT's incoming freshmen are the lowest since 1996 when scores were recentered, according to an online NT Fact Book post by the NT Center for Institutional Research.

After reaching an all-time high of 1105 in 2006, this year's mean SAT composite for new freshmen dropped 32 points to 1073, according to the post. This year, NT has 2,528 incoming freshmen that took the SAT, compared to 2,647 in 2006.

http://www.irs.ttu.edu/NEWFACTBOOK/2007/Sc...7SATCollege.htm

http://www.irim.ttu.edu/NEWFACTBOOK/2006/S...6SATCollege.htm

TTU 2007 1,092

TTU 2006 1,118

so Tech was ACTUALLY 13 points ahead in 2006 and 19 points ahead in 2007 and Kent Hance the Chancellor for Tech has said he will not allow them to decline again and Techs applications for admissions are already up 15% over last year

and again read the link to the UNT-Dallas master plan.....the law school is right in there mentioned on pages 11 and 12

--My opinion... as long as our wonderful Texas politicians continue to have these idiotic state tests (which take time away from real education by working with students on how to pass them) our national tests such as the SAT will continue to decline. We have these things so that politicians can "claim" they are trying to help education. Meanwhile our state politicians in Texas have been cutting back on state funding which could help public schools.

--Fact... We are seeing more and more students who do not pass the minimum requirements to be in classes for credit but have to take remedial classes. A second factor in the southwest is the recent immigration so that some students are now coming from homes that are not as educated as they once were a few years ago. They may be intelligent but their vocabulary and background education level is not what it once was. I know my kids were much better than I was at HS graduation since mine had parents with college degrees and my parents were not able to not even finish high school (depression) .

---Simple stats never tell the complete story but are useful to determine what to do or what is going on. (I teach stats) After you collect them then you also need to determine why they are what they are, and what you are really seeing. My HS graduation year had the higherst SAT scores of any of the next 30+ years. I was barely pre-Viet Nam. pre baby-boom, 99% of college students came from families that had spoken English for decades, plus not so many went to college then (Nam caused a lot of males to go to college) so the number of students taking the test was smaller that it became later. I could claim we were the smartest class ever but once you analyze what was really happening it might not be true. .

Edited May 20, 2008 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[TIgreen01]

more than one person mentioned the athletics as a way to draw in what 18yos care about

I do NOT think a stadium is a pet project......the UNT Dallas waste of resources is definitely a pet project of a fool named royce west......some still claim UNT won that campus over TAMU and TTU, but nothing is further from the truth.....TTU and TAMU declined to participate in something they saw as a waste and a pet project.....UNT took the bait and has been paying for it since

and yes students and alumin CAN do something to change a university......they can demand accountability for how their dollars are spend (or wasted in south dallas) and they can demand the administration pays attention to what the students want instead of further building up administrative infrastructure and pet dallas projects that will take professional schools and donations and time and energy from the main campus that is a long way away from where many on this forum claim it is or where they want it to be

You'll get no argument from me that UNT-Dallas is/was a bad idea from the beginning. In fact, I think you'll find no opposition on that point on this board....esp. if it can be proven that UNT-Dallas has taken away money that would have gone directly to building a new stadium.

Why come so hard to the table with the 'athletics is not the answer' argument if all you were really after was finding agreement that UNT-Dallas is a drain on Denton??

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

--Athletics has almost no effect on engineering or even academic standards.... good or bad.... why argue that???? It is as dumb argument... unless money is diverted to athletics from engineering or academic programs. What athletics will do is get you some "cheap" advertising that you exist and name recognition matters after leaving college. You can bet that if a an applicant walks in with a UNT degree or a McMurry degree, the UNT degree person is more likely to be hired unless the McMurry person is clearly better..... especially if seeking employment out of state from people who have never even heard the name.

--UT-D has the highest SAT scores of every state school in Texas...yet most people out here (West Texas) don't even know it exists. Wonder why?? No known athletic program?? Most people out here are also shocked to learn NT is larger than Tech or even Baylor. SMU, and TCU...much less that we are larger than those last three combined. Again the reputation of the athletic program makes them think that they are larger colleges than UNT.

Edited May 20, 2008 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[DeepGreen]

You'll get no argument from me that UNT-Dallas is/was a bad idea from the beginning.

I agree, stadium or no stadium. Why not sell off the whole UNT-Dallas campus to the Texas State University System. Cut the loss/drain on the Denton Campus. Use the money to build a new law school- at the Denton campus.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

I argue against that because that is the argument that was presented on this board....in this thread and in multiple others

many on this forum feel if all things stayed the same and UNT switched conferences with Tech suddenly UNT would be an even better university.....when that is completely false.....many on this forum have made repeated comparisons to other schools (often with false information about admissions ect) to try and elevate the stature of academics at UNT....when the fact is in many categories UNT is much closer to UT-A, UTSA, and TxState than they are to UT, TAMU, TTU, or UH

UNT is a tier 4 school for a reason....it has nothing to do with Tech taking anyone out for drinks as plummy and others claim

and soon when UH rises out of tier 4 to tier 3 and then probably higher and UNT stays the same....more false claims will appear......and if TTU can move from Tier 3 to a top 100 school things will really go crazy on this forum.......then you will have to see where the real issues are.....and it is not lack of Todge Effect, or who took who out for drinks, or who plays in what conference.....it will be about academics

---The tier rating is a joke... note the closer to NY the better you are likely rate (Northern editors and their schools maybe?) They even once had Princeton rated as a top law school (true).. they had no law school just a prelaw program.. (they do now) . Besides it is more important which major you are talking about not just just some generic term. Education is more about each individual and what they learned and not where they went. Don't want to get to specific about people but I know of some from "big-name schools" that are as dumb as dirt. I have heard several on respected TV programs claims Ivy League degrees just aren't worth the money in general unless the person wants to to work on Wall-Street (maybe National politics) and then it is more about who they meet and know than what they learned in class.

---I think you are reading something into most posts that just isn't there.... A better athletic program will help us in name recognition and may help us attract more of the top 25% academically... It is not the cure all to everything. UT and A&M have better SAT standards now than they did at one time because they are now extremely large (don't really want to get larger) and have a lot more applications than spaces... this is what drives up the SAT scores of those that are admitted, the lower ones just aren't enrolled. We aren't that large yet.... Colleges with large engineering depts usually have higher SATS than those without an engineering dept. . Those students make near perfect on the non-verbal part of the SAT (UT-Dallas?) ---again you need to analyze the Stats not just read them, a good education teaches you how to analyze and apply what you have learned... not just quote a bunch of "facts" that has been learned.

Edited May 20, 2008 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[Green Mean]

I argue against that because that is the argument that was presented on this board....in this thread and in multiple others

many on this forum feel if all things stayed the same and UNT switched conferences with Tech suddenly UNT would be an even better university.....when that is completely false.....many on this forum have made repeated comparisons to other schools (often with false information about admissions ect) to try and elevate the stature of academics at UNT....when the fact is in many categories UNT is much closer to UT-A, UTSA, and TxState than they are to UT, TAMU, TTU, or UH

UNT is a tier 4 school for a reason....it has nothing to do with Tech taking anyone out for drinks as plummy and others claim

and soon when UH rises out of tier 4 to tier 3 and then probably higher and UNT stays the same....more false claims will appear......and if TTU can move from Tier 3 to a top 100 school things will really go crazy on this forum.......then you will have to see where the real issues are.....and it is not lack of Todge Effect, or who took who out for drinks, or who plays in what conference.....it will be about academics

I agree with much of your statemtns but if UNT moved into the Big 12 then technically UNT would not be a "better" school but perception wise it would definitely be much much better. Perception is reality in this world whether you like it or not in most peoples eyes.

[keith]

Maybe it was in one of those spreadsheets someplace. I'm curious, UT, A&M and NT, for example, are all "state-supported" universities, right? In other words, the State of Texas provides some amount of financial support/funding to all three universities. What is the relative amount of annual funding these three receive, both in absolute dollars and per student dollars? Does anyone know (CheckFacts, perhaps you do)?

Keith

[Eagle1855]

I agree with much of your statemtns but if UNT moved into the Big 12 then technically UNT would not be a "better" school but perception wise it would definitely be much much better. Perception is reality in this world whether you like it or not in most peoples eyes.

You're right, we would be perceived as better.

But why would the Big 12 want UNT? I think even if we had several top-25 athletic programs, schools like Texas wouldn't want us in there because of our perceived academic shortcomings (ie: tier 4 ranking).

[Green Mean]

You're right, we would be perceived as better.

But why would the Big 12 want UNT? I think even if we had several top-25 athletic programs, schools like Texas wouldn't want us in there because of our perceived academic shortcomings (ie: tier 4 ranking).

Oh you are absolutely right...its just hypothetical. Honestly speaking, if I was the Big 12 I wouldnt want UNT in my conference because of their lack of committment to athletics. I would rather have UH or TCU in before UNT.

[Green Mean]

Maybe it was in one of those spreadsheets someplace. I'm curious, UT, A&M and NT, for example, are all "state-supported" universities, right? In other words, the State of Texas provides some amount of financial support/funding to all three universities. What is the relative amount of annual funding these three receive, both in absolute dollars and per student dollars? Does anyone know (CheckFacts, perhaps you do)?

Keith

I took a real estate class once with John Baen and he said yes that we are all public schools but UT and A&M get a ton of money through some oil deal made back in the day. He said so many millions upon millions of dollars came from this agreement and these two schools were apart of recieving the money but NT and other schools were not. I think somone who knows this situation more can comment much more clearly and more detailed but he said that is why NT is considered "poor" and UT and A&M are extremely extremely wealthy, always have been and always will be.

[Guest GrayEagleOne]

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

Admittedly, I know little of either's academics but I do know of their athletics, therefore I'm familiar with the university. The only university of those three that I would know about otherwise is LSU and that's because I grew up in Louisiana. Hawaii athletics are not underfunded. Their revenue in 2007 was $26.51 million which was about $90 thousand more than their expenses. That also allowed 440 students to attend college who might not otherwise have been able to do so. Their facilities are supposedly deterioted but I blame that on the athletic administration. They host the NFL All-Star Game, the Hawaii Bowl, and used to have an extra home game, of which the profits should have gone to upgrade other facilities. Yes, Boise State has a reputation of offering mechanics because they are not that far removed from being a junior college. Without athletics they'd still be a junior college and academics would be a moot point. As for LSU, if their academics are failing it's their own fault. The state legislature is predominately made up of LSU alums and they take care of LSU to the detriment of all other Louisiana state universities.

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

Had SMU never had an athletic program to the extent that had, probably millions of people less would have ever heard of them. They are a private school and the three that you compare them with are state schools. Private schools have much more leeway to target the programs that they want to publicize and most have the money to do it. Only the institution determines the amount of funds available that may be spent on athletics. State schools cannot use any state funds for athletics. Yet, the publicity generated by athletics increases student applications which in turn expands academics due to demand.

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

Do you have any proof to the contrary? Actually, several have pointed out from time to time the increase in student applications after a successful season or a bowl victory.

You mentioned UTA so I thought that I'd comment one that. I have several friends that I found out are UTA graduates ONLY after their basketball team made the NCAA tournament. None had given any money recently to UTA. I know that one did until they dropped football. Part of the recovery in enrollment is indirectly attributed to UT's success. The University raised their standards because they did not have the facilities to handle the demand. As a result, it was posted that several hundred students, who would have been accepted under the old standards, chose UTA. Still, UTA is well-known in the metroplex but were it not for Southland Conference athletics, primarily basketball, would be a virtual unknown around the rest of the state.

Many people are aware of the University of Chicago because Jay Berwanger won the first Heisman Trophy. Can you name an academic accomplishment? Again, that is a private university, expensive as hell (more than $50,000 per year total, and should never be compared to the University of North Texas.

A new stadium will make a statement about the quality and committment to UNT. Fouts has served its time and has become an eyesore. It is time to make a change and the sooner, the better.

If you want a cohesive university that gives back, athletics are the way to go.

Edited May 20, 2008 by GrayEagleOne

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

You're right, we would be perceived as better.

But why would the Big 12 want UNT? I think even if we had several top-25 athletic programs, schools like Texas wouldn't want us in there because of our perceived academic shortcomings (ie: tier 4 ranking).

Two things that are really important...

"What is True and what people think is true".

[emmitt01]

I argue against that because that is the argument that was presented on this board....in this thread and in multiple others

many on this forum feel if all things stayed the same and UNT switched conferences with Tech suddenly UNT would be an even better university.....when that is completely false.....many on this forum have made repeated comparisons to other schools (often with false information about admissions ect) to try and elevate the stature of academics at UNT....when the fact is in many categories UNT is much closer to UT-A, UTSA, and TxState than they are to UT, TAMU, TTU, or UH

UNT is a tier 4 school for a reason....it has nothing to do with Tech taking anyone out for drinks as plummy and others claim

and soon when UH rises out of tier 4 to tier 3 and then probably higher and UNT stays the same....more false claims will appear......and if TTU can move from Tier 3 to a top 100 school things will really go crazy on this forum.......then you will have to see where the real issues are.....and it is not lack of Todge Effect, or who took who out for drinks, or who plays in what conference.....it will be about academics

I guess then the question comes down to this.

What drew you here to educate us, the lost sheep of NT who are clearly so disillusioned in the first place? If, as you say, we are all clinging to flat earth type notions about our alma mater, what greater good do you serve by brining us into the light...aside from, of course, being a smarmy bastard?

[Censored by Laurie]

I guess then the question comes down to this.

What drew you here to educate us, the lost sheep of NT who are clearly so disillusioned in the first place? If, as you say, we are all clinging to flat earth type notions about our alma mater, what greater good do you serve by brining us into the light...aside from, of course, being a smarmy bastard?

I dont have the time to find a facepalm picture to post...so perhaps just a mention of it will sufice.

All this guy is doing is presenting dissenting opinions from those commonly held by the majority of this board...and one that he has clearly taken the time to research. Is his research accurate? I don't know...I'd rather penalty kill at work researching Sun Belt Basketball recruiting classes and know that my UNT degree helped land me a good job and will be of great assistance in reaching my future goals.

Its guys like CheckFacts who keep our board from becoming Hilltopper Haven were every thread is 5 pages of posts exclaiming how great we are...there are faults and all this guys doing is pointing them out. Try contributing a refute rather than a personal attack.

[UNTflyer]

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

Wrong. It will be an independent school operating in downtown Dallas, at the old City Hall.

[NT80]

I argue against that because that is the argument that was presented on this board....in this thread and in multiple others

many on this forum feel if all things stayed the same and UNT switched conferences with Tech suddenly UNT would be an even better university.....when that is completely false.....many on this forum have made repeated comparisons to other schools (often with false information about admissions ect) to try and elevate the stature of academics at UNT....when the fact is in many categories UNT is much closer to UT-A, UTSA, and TxState than they are to UT, TAMU, TTU, or UH

UNT is a tier 4 school for a reason....it has nothing to do with Tech taking anyone out for drinks as plummy and others claim

and soon when UH rises out of tier 4 to tier 3 and then probably higher and UNT stays the same....more false claims will appear......and if TTU can move from Tier 3 to a top 100 school things will really go crazy on this forum.......then you will have to see where the real issues are.....and it is not lack of Todge Effect, or who took who out for drinks, or who plays in what conference.....it will be about academics

First, academics are overrated. College is simply a transition from school life to working life, and little learned in college is applicable to the working world. I realize you have some great desire to see UNT rise to Tier 1 and become the Harvard of the Southwest, but we both know it won't happen so I'd rather us win a National Championship in Football or Basketball. I believe that would achieve far more donation $$, media, and image than any World Report rankings. Ask Joe Public hiring for AAA MegaCompany who came from the better business school: UC-Davis applicant or LSU applicant? I say he hires Mr. LSU because of it's recent media and sports image.

[UNTflyer]

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

I think it is logical to assume that athletic success raises interest in a school. When you suddenly have an application to population ratio of say 2:1 or 3:1, you can pick and choose your students, and raise academic success.

[Green Mean]

because

A. I was a student at UNT at one time in CS and saw what a horrible administration can to to a program with potential first hand

B. I am a resident of Texas born and raised so what matters to Texas matters to me.......be it at schools I have attended or at schools I have never been to.....in cities where I have lived and loved....or in cities I have lived in and would rather forget.....what goes on with Texas, the tax dollars of Texas, and Texas higher education is important to me

you can take any position you wish and call names like smarmy......but that does not change the fact that athletics will only change the PERCEPTION of some that have no real clue about higher education......and it will not stop waste and lack of focus that holds some schools WAY back from what they PERCEIVE they are or what they want to be

checkfacts,

I was wondering are you a UNT Alum? If not where did you graduate and etc?

[Stan R]

I agree with Emmitt from this standpoint - we all know of the universities academic status or perceived status or whatever yardstick you choose to use. No one among us wants success in Athletics to take away from potential successes in the classrooms or research arenas. But he has two points that I strongly disagree with.

1.) That UNT should just "get it over with" and merge with the UT or TAMU system.

- I feel the North Texas area is plenty large enough to have its own independent System university. In fact this area's population explosion will only CONTINUE to increase, not decrease due to affordable housing.

2.) That essentially all this effort for fund raising for a new stadium or athletic programs is somehow preventing UNT from putting funds to where it needs to be most to increase the TIER status - Professors, endowment, etc.

- The bottom line (at least to me) in raising the bar on our Tier status or academic status is to show the above average student that UNT is a solid 4 year university that aspires to be big time. Yes athletics is only one way to show that but like everyone else has said - perception IS REALITY. And many of the major factors in the TIER ratings that would be improved with better athletic success involve alumni GIVING RATES which directly contribute to ENDOWMENTS, Funded scholarships, etc.

Basically the key is to get the alumni to care enough to give back. Two of the biggest things done in the past and hopefully future are and will be :

1.) New college of engineering - HUGE factor to increasing donation levels and quality of applicants.

2.) New football stadium. HUGE factor to increasing alumni apathy and connection to the school.

[Stan R]

And to address the comments regarding the College Of Engineering's struggles- come on, give me a break - this college has been around for what - 5-7 years? You don't snap your fingers and have all of the degree plans in engineering that say a Texas Tech has. These programs take time to build. The point is that the process has started and the university is committed to it. Success will come in time when high school students see it as a more mature program that they would choose instead of driving a million miles away to TTU and who prefer a more traditional college experience than something at UTD. We just have to become that sweet spot.

[TIgreen01]

because I still stand by the fact that athletics is not the answer

it is not the answer to any of the factors on the THECB spread sheet that show UNT at or near the bottom of most categories for Emerging Research Universities in Texas and athletics is not the answer to a 93 million dollar endowment

nor is athletics the answer for the THECB having a goal of UNT doing 30 million in external research by 2020......I feel it would be better to point that out now rather than watch and lurk and wait until the Flutie Effect (renamed the Todge Effect) comes to UNT.....and UNT is still no where near a Tier 1 university and further behind the schools you feel you compare to academically

Athletics is also not the answer for UNT losing faculty faster than they can hire them in Engineering and UNT dropping their civil engineering technology degree before the Engineering College started (which is why UNT has no civil engineering degree) and the current civil engineering technology program not being ABET accredited

People....this guy gave himself away a page ago. He is a troll. Let it go.

Edited May 20, 2008 by TIgreen01

[Stan R]

and if you are not careful you will find that the "leading" school in the metroplex is the one in south dallas with a Law School and a state senator in charge of the senate education committee and his little buddy jackson (not emmit) carrying the water for UNT Dallas

Ok this was a good discussion and then you had to pull out the tinfoil hat. Schools within systems don't flip flop on which on is the Flagship. I doubt that has ever happened in the history of higher education in this country.

[CMJ]

Ok this was a good discussion and then you had to pull out the tinfoil hat. Schools within systems don't flip flop on which on is the Flagship. I doubt that has ever happened in the history of higher education in this country.

While i don't know if they've "flipped" - UCLA is nearly as prestigious as Berkely overall, and more so in many fields I would wager.