Whada We Got?

emmitt01 · June 18, 2008

I am definitely a homer, but trying to somehow elevate last season's performance because of a few close games is more than a stretch. First, the two victories could have been more easily defeats than any of the games that NT lost that could have been wins. NT had a nail biter in beating out essentially a 1-AA team, WKU. The 10 point victory over ULM was primarily due to two interceptions returned for td's.
The only really close lost NT had was by four points to ASU. While not on the order of 69 and 59 loses to OU and Arkansas respectively, loses to MTSU by 20 and Troy by 38 were hardly stellar performances. Add to that the fact that NT was the only team to lose to both SMU (by 14) and FIU (by 19) should definitely quite any "so close to winning" talk.

Are you talking about the same SMU that many predict to beat Rice, give Tulsa a run for their money and to improve by 3 games in their win/loss tally?

Not saying that we are guaranteed 5-6 wins by any means but even the strongest pessimist has to admit we are a year further along in the offense and got rid of the largest problem our defense had.

BIG DAWG · June 18, 2008

I am definitely a homer, but trying to somehow elevate last season's performance because of a few close games is more than a stretch. First, the two victories could have been more easily defeats than any of the games that NT lost that could have been wins. NT had a nail biter in beating out essentially a 1-AA team, WKU. The 10 point victory over ULM was primarily due to two interceptions returned for td's.
The only really close lost NT had was by four points to ASU. While not on the order of 69 and 59 loses to OU and Arkansas respectively, loses to MTSU by 20 and Troy by 38 were hardly stellar performances. Add to that the fact that NT was the only team to lose to both SMU (by 14) and FIU (by 19) should definitely quite any "so close to winning" talk.

I know a lot ofpeople on this board look at things through green tinted glasses, but CRAP can you look at anything more negative than this post???

"Well if we didn't make the plays we did we would have lost..."

Doesn't that go for every team in every sport?

SilverEagle · June 18, 2008

Harry, did you overlook Jonathan Stewart? That gives us two DL with extensive 1-A experience. Didn't Jesse DeSoto get some playing time last year? What about Isaac Thomas?

I'm encouraged by Draylen Ross being back on the active roster. If anyone can help bring out his (great) potentional it's Coach Deloach. If that happens, then we could have a real force in the DL. If Charlie Brown is going to play DL and not DE, then that should be a real interesting story. Charlie is a very hard worker.

Did anyone notice how J. Scoggins was doing in the spring?

I think we are pretty set at DE. If our DL can just hold their own, then we'll be much better than last year.

Dallas, Corkey Nelson's first year was 2-9, and his next year was the conference championship. After some of his Juco's from the previous year flunked out, his third year he went 2-9. Hayden Fry was 5-5-1 (conference co-champ) the first year and 2-7-2 the next year.

I would save any critical remarks about Dodge until after this season.

pollock · June 18, 2008

That is in Killeen,Tx.

Is that an inside joke? A ticket drop that I've somehow missed?

GrandGreen · June 18, 2008

I know a lot ofpeople on this board look at things through green tinted glasses, but CRAP can you look at anything more negative than this post???
"Well if we didn't make the plays we did we would have lost..."
Doesn't that go for every team in every sport?

Thanks, for supporting my point. Yes, it does go for every team in every sport. "Well if we didn't make the plays we did we would have lost..." is exactly the same as "well if we make the plays we would have won". As far as the negativity, the focus of the comment was to question all that sunshine created by those near victories NT had last year. But CRAP, I am sure I could have been more positive.

mad dog · June 18, 2008

The bottom line in sports is pretty easy to call: did you win the games or not? That's the easiest thing in the world to see. However, to say that there is no other worthwhile measure of success is, in my opinion, a bit of an oversimplification.

There are so many factors that play into what I'd define as success: Who did you play? How close did you play? Did you get blown out? Did you make any big plays? Were you still playing hard in the 4th quarter or did you give up? Who were the leaders on the field? How did the young guys look? How many injuries did you play through?

If you're bottom lining it, you are exactly right to say that winning is the most important thing. But, with respect to that line of thinking, I do not think it is the ONLY way you can look at a season. Which is better? A 2-9 season where you get shut out and blown out in all 9 losses? Or a 2-9 season where you lose half a dozen games by two touchdowns or less?

If winning is everything, then I shouldn't care if you get blown out by 70 points or if you lose on a last second field goal. But it does feel different to me. Likewise, if we were to take LSU to the wire next year, and lose on a 50 yard field goal as time expires, I would view that as more successful than getting blasted by 50 points. And I think media outlets, casual fans, and joe on the street would all agree.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · June 18, 2008

I just hope people are patient with Gary DeLoach. He arrived at UNT in 1998 as the secondary coach. It took awhile to build up the defense. And, we were still blown out on OOC road games while he was DC (2000-2002), In 2000, his first year as DC, Kansas State hung 55 on us, and Boise State put up 59. In 2001, OU hit us up for 37, Texas Tech for 42, and Colorado State (NO Bowl) for 45.

It wasn't until 2002 that the defense held OOC opponents (relatively) down. Texas scored only 27, Alabama 33. We almost beat one of John Mackovic's crappy Arizona teams in Tucson, losing 14-9.

The point is, in 2002, guys had been working in DeLoach's scheme for three season. The senior secondary guys in 2002 had never played for another coach in their entire collegiate careers.

The scenario in 2008 is vastly different. There's weird mix on defense without a ton of experience. The going back to 2006, this will be the third different DC in three years for the older players on defense. Ditto the young guys who went from high school coaching in 2006, semi-college coaching in 2007, to DeLoach in 2008. There's alot of work to be done, much to be learned by these guys.

Just be patient if the thing doesn't click immediately. It took a couple of years for DeLoach to shore things up a few years back. I think some people here are expecting a miracle turn around based on "Old Days Syndrome." But, the good "old days" of 2002 took awhile to work up to.

Green Lantern · June 18, 2008

I just hope people are patient with Gary DeLoach. He arrived at UNT in 1998 as the secondary coach. It took awhile to build up the defense. And, we were still blown out on OOC road games while he was DC (2000-2002), In 2000, his first year as DC, Kansas State hung 55 on us, and Boise State put up 59. In 2001, OU hit us up for 37, Texas Tech for 42, and Colorado State (NO Bowl) for 45.
It wasn't until 2002 that the defense held OOC opponents (relatively) down. Texas scored only 27, Alabama 33. We almost beat one of John Mackovic's crappy Arizona teams in Tucson, losing 14-9.
The point is, in 2002, guys had been working in DeLoach's scheme for three season. The senior secondary guys in 2002 had never played for another coach in their entire collegiate careers.
The scenario in 2008 is vastly different. There's weird mix on defense without a ton of experience. The going back to 2006, this will be the third different DC in three years for the older players on defense. Ditto the young guys who went from high school coaching in 2006, semi-college coaching in 2007, to DeLoach in 2008. There's alot of work to be done, much to be learned by these guys.
Just be patient if the thing doesn't click immediately. It took a couple of years for DeLoach to shore things up a few years back. I think some people here are expecting a miracle turn around based on "Old Days Syndrome." But, the good "old days" of 2002 took awhile to work up to.

This is a really good point. I think that we will see improvement on the defensive side of the ball this year, but to expect that the defense will be back to playing at the level that they were before Deloach left for UCLA is unrealisitc. There are still quite a few unknowns as far as personnel is concerned on that side of the ball for me to believe blindly in a 180 degree turnaround in a year.

That being said...some defensive inprovement + any semblence of consistent special teams play, and I think that we get a few more wins than last years team.

MeanGreen61 · June 18, 2008

If DeLoach can just get the defense back to the pre-Mendoza level it will make a huge difference.

'07 45.08 ppg given up

'06 25.33 ppg given up

'05 28.83 ppg given up

Edited June 18, 2008 by MeanGreen61

Mean Green 93-98 · June 18, 2008

Good post, Lonnie.

GoMeanGreen1999 · June 18, 2008

I just hope people are patient with Gary DeLoach. He arrived at UNT in 1998 as the secondary coach. It took awhile to build up the defense. And, we were still blown out on OOC road games while he was DC (2000-2002), In 2000, his first year as DC, Kansas State hung 55 on us, and Boise State put up 59. In 2001, OU hit us up for 37, Texas Tech for 42, and Colorado State (NO Bowl) for 45.
It wasn't until 2002 that the defense held OOC opponents (relatively) down. Texas scored only 27, Alabama 33. We almost beat one of John Mackovic's crappy Arizona teams in Tucson, losing 14-9.
The point is, in 2002, guys had been working in DeLoach's scheme for three season. The senior secondary guys in 2002 had never played for another coach in their entire collegiate careers.
The scenario in 2008 is vastly different. There's weird mix on defense without a ton of experience. The going back to 2006, this will be the third different DC in three years for the older players on defense. Ditto the young guys who went from high school coaching in 2006, semi-college coaching in 2007, to DeLoach in 2008. There's alot of work to be done, much to be learned by these guys.
Just be patient if the thing doesn't click immediately. It took a couple of years for DeLoach to shore things up a few years back. I think some people here are expecting a miracle turn around based on "Old Days Syndrome." But, the good "old days" of 2002 took awhile to work up to.

Great post. I think some need to tap the brakes a little on what they think DeLoach is going to be able to get done in just the first season. I really think he will turn the defense around, but he has no where close to the talent he had in those years, and he doesn't have the defensive coaches that he had working with him either. It is just going to take some time. Will the defense be better this year? Yes, it will, but if it is giving up 15 points less this season than it did last, that is a huge difference. Does that translate to 4 more wins, who knows.

kj86 · June 18, 2008

Is that an inside joke? A ticket drop that I've somehow missed?

Must be, cause it makes no sense whatsoever.

DeepGreen · June 18, 2008

DeLoach is a great coach and I'm glad to have him back at NT. But it still takes talented athletes to get our defense to where it really needs to be. We have a few, but not near enough.

GoMeanGreen1999 · June 19, 2008

DeLoach is a great coach and I'm glad to have him back at NT. But it still takes talented athletes to get our defense to where it really needs to be. We have a few, but not near enough.

Didn't we also have some other fairly good defensive coaches working with him? It is going to take some time.

GreenFlag · June 19, 2008

We are in great shape at QB, RB, and WR. We are in decent shape at P, K, LB, and DB's. The jury is still out on the OL-they won't be great but they might not be that bad either. Our DL needs some serious help. Like Cerebus said, lineman, lineman, lineman, lineman! GreenFlag sez D-lineman, D-lineman, D-lineman, D-lineman! If I had to choose a position where I could have a super stud to build a program around it would be DT, not QB. A good defensive line can compensate so well for other weaknesses. Brandon Kennedy taught me that. They magically make everyone better on defense.

This is a 2-3 win team if expectations aren't greatly exceeded on the defensive line. Those 2-3 wins will be when the offense is clicking so well (against below average D-lines) that other teams have to radically adjust game plans to be crazy agressive. We will have those games and it will be fun to watch. If expectations are greatly exceeded on DL, we may win 4-5 games. If we lose some key players on the D-line, we could go winless. There, I said it-winless. O-fer. Todd Dodge inherited a f'ing awful football team that was terribly thin at key positions. I hope to see redshirt and true freshmen starting soon on the DL.

This year will show even more improvement on offense. This year will also be exciting. We will also see some serious blowout loses.

Gary DeLoach is a huge upgrade but the cupboard is still almost bare. The Todd Dodge era at North Texas will be determined on how many stud lineman he can get in here on both sides of the ball.

I'm not trying to be negative folks, it's just the way I see it.

June 19, 2008

The one thing nobody on the board talks about is the special teams units even though it single handedly cost us at least a couple wins last season. Just curious as to what everyone's take is there this year---as far as who'll be playing and how we'll do. I bring this up b/c I picked up a copy of Phil Steele's mag yesterday and saw what our rankings for ST were during DD's years here....we were very often very good (in the top 50 every year but one(when we had unusually high player turnover) and in top 20 at least once?---don't have the mag in front of me now). Last year, though, we slipped down to 118 out of 119 teams. I realize our kicking situation was a big part of that, but we didn't cover kicks well and also had a few punts blocked. So in the offseason we signed a kicker and a return man. Is that going to be enough....what needs to happen for us to get back to top 50 as an overall ST unit?

If special teams aren't the most improved area of the team, blame it on the coaches. Punting continues to be good for at least one more year and there should be no more blocked punts. Field goal kicking should be far better; maybe in the top two or three in the conference. The areas of greatest improvement, however, should be in returns and coverage. The reason.....speed. Jamel Jackson should handle punt returns and most of the kickoff returns and he can fly. As for kickoff coverage, I look for 6-8 of the incoming freshmen to be a part of that team. People like Hamilton, Cook, (Royce) Hill, Shorter, Akpunku, and Williams are all 4.5 or better and experienced at kickoff and punt coverage. I think that this group will consistently take away several yards over last year's group. The only area that concerns me a little is dee-snapper. There were a lot of high snaps that Phillips had to get up to get and saved us points and blocks. Hope springs eternal that that area will be better this year.

foutsrouts · June 19, 2008

I have us at 9-4. The defense, young or not will come through in a big way, and the offense will score one hell of a lot of points. Mark this post. If you don't I'll be back to mark it for you. SBC champs again!

Green59 · June 19, 2008

The only area that concerns me a little is dee-snapper. There were a lot of high snaps that Phillips had to get up to get and saved us points and blocks. Hope springs eternal that that area will be better this year.

I went to all the scrimmages this spring. I noticed there was a change in the FG/XP snapper position and that a redshirt freshman, Troy Kokjohn, did the snapping.

Cerebus · June 19, 2008

TFLF had a great point about time.

Don't over look what greenflag said about DT's.

I don't think it is any coincidence we had our greatest defenses at the same time BK was destroying interior linemen. I have never seen anyone on the defensive side of the ball have as much impact as he did. Booger was a force of nature.

pollock · June 19, 2008

I went to all the scrimmages this spring. I noticed there was a change in the FG/XP snapper position and that a redshirt freshman, Troy Kokjohn, did the snapping.

Wow, unfortunate name.

greenminer · June 19, 2008

Wow, unfortunate name.

Or a very appropriate one for a guy "pullling the trigger" per se.

Only sick to a sick mind?

GoMeanGreen1999 · June 19, 2008

Wow, unfortunate name.

Might make Gordo's list.

LongJim · June 19, 2008

Let me see how many cliches I can use:

We gotta a helluva young QB in Vizza and another one waiting in the wings (Riley)

I was really impressed by Vizza last season. I thought for his age and experience level, he had an incredible season. He is obviously the real deal, and although it's early, the kid has a chance to be the best ever at that position for UNT. Riley needs a RS season IMO, and then this position is set for a while.

We have a solid RB in Micah Moseley and in my opinion an electric one in Dunbar coming on board.

I agree. I want to see more from Moseley, but he runs hard, and works hard, and this could be a great year for him. The potential change up of having Dunbar is terrific, as well.

We have the most talented stable of receivers I have ever seen here.

Deep and talented. Ridiculous for UNT. A good ridiculous.

We have an offensive line that is more experienced and deeper although surely not deep enough.

Potentially the Achilles heel of this offense, and the season's success will hinge on their development--again.

We have one defensive tackle that has proven he can play fairly consistently but needs to put on size (Joe Miller). That's it folks and that aint enough.

See offensive line, above. I expect a lot of 'scrappy play' from this group, but I worried. [EDIT: I ARE worried.] :ph34r:

We have two talented defensive ends that are streaky (Gilmore) and unproven at this level (Horton). Very thin and unproven behind them.

Unproven, but a lot of potential here. I predict a pleasant surprise from this group. Don't axe me why.

We have one proven linebacker Craig Robertson that is a stud. Penson and Davis are waiting in the wings but not the proven group of the past couple of years.

This group will struggle early, but I predict will become a strong point by season's end.

We have a ton of young talented athletes that are fighting for the 4 DB spots of which probably 3 are wide open.

If play here can improve at all, the potential for a big defensive turnaround this year is huge. These guys can only get better, and I think we'll all see a big difference in the secondary play this season.