Admin-A-Fying Is Hard

Harry · September 16, 2010

Regardless of the actual quote in this article or any other, if there is an implied ultimatum for 7 games and RV does not come out and deny it, then he has passively confirmed it. Regardless of if it is or isn't an actual obligation, the perception is there, and likely there in the eyes of the team as well. So you're telling me that if we go (heaven forbid) 0-6, it won't disrupt the team if he's a lame duck. What message does it send to the players (who came to play not just for him, but for the chance to play for a D1 school and for the scholarship)? That the University is serious about competing, and that consistent failure to produce will result in consequences? That in the real world, success is measured by productivity? In the real world, it's employment at will, and that means you can be hired or fired regardless of how good a person you are?

I don't dispute that Todd Dodge has been an asset to the program. He has been nothing but respectful of the university and of the administration. He has carried himself with poise despite the negative press. You couldn't ask for a better coach for football PR. However, this is ultimately about financial sustainability. And in this day and age, to make a lot of money in football, you have to win.

Well stated untgirl04.

GreenStreet · September 16, 2010

IF we lose to Army,

Wont happen now that Thompson is the QB, we will win out.

Insert Tune, and yeah fire TD.

Will to Win · September 16, 2010

Even if we lose to Army, a 9-win season is possible.

stop it, just stop it, enough with with the shoulda coulda woulda. snap out of it.

UNT90 · September 16, 2010

The actual quote was from Dodge and it was "Six wins won't get it done." There is, however, no direct indication that 7 games is a mandate from the AD, or if that is simply the bar that Dodge believe he must clear in order to see this season as a success.

To the point - if we have a 12 game season, that means until we've lost 5 games, the possibility of winning 7 still remains. If there IS a deal in place, you ABSOLUTELY don't fire the man until the deal is unreachable.

While firing the coach mid season might satisfy some fans who are looking to gnaw on raw meat, the disruption to the team and the message that sends to the players, especially the seniors who have played for this man since they were Freshman, who CAME HERE to play for him, is not the message we should be sending. A choice was made last year to give Dodge the full 4 years to make it happen. Even if you know he's not going to return after the 5th game of the season, you let the man finish his season, say good-bye to his players.

We may look back and see Todd Dodge as a poor football coach, but I believe the VAST majority here feel that he has done a lot of good for the program, even if it hasn't translated to the number of wins we all want to see, and the University should treat him with respect even if it is in his release. ...he may return to being the winningest high-school coach in the state. No need to create bad blood. No need to burn a bridge.

The actual quote was from RV and it was 7 wins or else.

It amazes me that people on here want to keep trying to get away from this. It was on the podcast with Harry right after last season.

GO LISTEN TO THE PODCAST AND HEAR IT FOR YOURSELVES!

This is meant for the population on this board that refuse to acknowledge this and not directed at you yyz28.

yyz28 · September 16, 2010

Regardless of the actual quote in this article or any other, if there is an implied ultimatum for 7 games and RV does not come out and deny it, then he has passively confirmed it. Regardless of if it is or isn't an actual obligation, the perception is there, and likely there in the eyes of the team as well. So you're telling me that if we go (heaven forbid) 0-6, it won't disrupt the team if he's a lame duck. What message does it send to the players (who came to play not just for him, but for the chance to play for a D1 school and for the scholarship)? That the University is serious about competing, and that consistent failure to produce will result in consequences? That in the real world, success is measured by productivity? In the real world, it's employment at will, and that means you can be hired or fired regardless of how good a person you are?

I don't dispute that Todd Dodge has been an asset to the program. He has been nothing but respectful of the university and of the administration. He has carried himself with poise despite the negative press. You couldn't ask for a better coach for football PR. However, this is ultimately about financial sustainability. And in this day and age, to make a lot of money in football, you have to win.

I'm not saying that if he doesn't hit the bar, real or not, he shouln't be fired. In fact, he should. If he doesn't have a winning season this year, my vote would be to fire him AFTER THE SEASON IS OVER.

...but what exactly do we (the program, the players and the University) gain by taking him out in the middle of the season? I.E. firing him on October 11th (the monday after the 6th loss assuming he doesn't win one before then

) What does that reall gain us over firing him on November 29th?

I argue the answer is NOTHING.

If he fails then his two coordinators have ALSO failed as they are both pretty well at the helm of their prospective ships at this point. What do we gain by making one of them interum head coach when we (should) have no intention of promoting either of them to Head Coach the following year... In fact, you're going as far as telling the interum head coach that he's going to be fired in 5 weeks too, so what is really the motivation? Why would we assume things would improve this season by making this move?

WHY create additional upheaval in the middle of the season? Why do something that can be perceived as classless by anyone? Why do something that may cause bad blood amoung any of the players, players parents, and even the staff, a lot of whom may be friends to the program and in positions to help as HS Coaches in NT's recruting area? To gain six weeks in a national coaching search?

Regardless of the state's requirements of how long a job is posted, if there IS a hard set "7 wins or your history", you can bank on the fact that RV will begin the effort of finding the new coach the DAY AFTER the 6th loss. You don't have to fire Dodge mid season to start the search right then and there.

meangreenbob · September 16, 2010

IF we lose to Army, should TD be fired during the season, or should RV hold up his end of the bargain and see if we can actually get to 7 wins?

If you fire Dodge before the 7 win threshold, then you have two problems. The second being the integrity of your Athletic Director.

Mean Green 93-98 · September 16, 2010

If you fire Dodge before the 7 win threshold, then you have two problems. The second being the integrity of your Athletic Director.

Is there a reason you are holding out on the first? :unsure:

rcade · September 16, 2010

While firing the coach mid season might satisfy some fans who are looking to gnaw on raw meat, the disruption to the team and the message that sends to the players, especially the seniors who have played for this man since they were Freshman, who CAME HERE to play for him, is not the message we should be sending. A choice was made last year to give Dodge the full 4 years to make it happen. Even if you know he's not going to return after the 5th game of the season, you let the man finish his season, say good-bye to his players.

We may look back and see Todd Dodge as a poor football coach, but I believe the VAST majority here feel that he has done a lot of good for the program, even if it hasn't translated to the number of wins we all want to see, and the University should treat him with respect even if it is in his release. ...he may return to being the winningest high-school coach in the state. No need to create bad blood. No need to burn a bridge.

Coaches who don't get the job done deserve the same amount of consideration they give players who don't get the job done. Dodge is a big boy. He doesn't need to be coddled if he isn't getting the job done.

As for him doing "a lot of good" for the program, you gotta be kidding. A football coach who doesn't win has accomplished nothing.

rcade · September 16, 2010

stop it, just stop it, enough with with the shoulda coulda woulda. snap out of it.

I never said he would win 9 games. I just said it's theoretically possible, so firing him would be premature.

rcade · September 16, 2010

Yeah...I believe in Santa Clause...Unicorns....and magical fairy dust too...HA!

Sheesh. I don't think we will win the last 9. But a winning season in conference play is the minimum level of success to get me on board keeping Dodge for another year.

Edited September 16, 2010 by rcade

meangreenbob · September 16, 2010

Coaches who don't get the job done deserve the same amount of consideration they give players who don't get the job done. Dodge is a big boy. He doesn't need to be coddled if he isn't getting the job done.

As for him doing "a lot of good" for the program, you gotta be kidding. A football coach who doesn't win has accomplished nothing.

I agree, where is it written that you can't do both?

KoldBeer · September 16, 2010

I don't see any reason to fire the coach until there is a game or two left in the season. Anybody who would be a candidate will be working at another school and won't leave until their season is over (unless you want to go with somebody currently unemployed). If things don't turn around, I'd announce that he wasn't returning before the KSU game or the game before that. Then you would have time to start forming a search committee and start sending out feelers. You don't want to do too much while you coach is still in place. But if we are 2-8 then everybody already knows he is gone. It's only an issue if we are 4-6 or something like that.

BeatNavy · September 16, 2010

This outside observer thinks that there are SOME things gained by firing a coach in mid-season.

The most obvious is that the search for a new coach can officially being sooner. To conclude that this is a gain requires that we assume that having more time to make a decision leads to a better outcome than having less time. Sometimes this is true, sometimes it is not (I'm looking at my alma mater here: hiring Bobby Ross after a mid-season firing of Todd Berry was NOT a good decision).

The next most obvious is that it can help cure any "poison" caused by doubts about the head coach's future. If he's fired, then all doubts about his future with the program are eliminated. Of course, you're really just exchanging that doubt for others. Lots of others.

The third thing that quickly pops to mind is that the firing sends a signal -- win (and do it while meeting other stated goals) or you will not have a job -- and makes it clear to everyone that the administration is serious about the athletic program. Of course, the signal intended to be sent might (will) be misinterpreted by some (many).

The only other good things I can think of really only apply in cases of gross misconduct or bad behavior by the coach, and you guys don't have to worry about that.

If you accept that there are SOME good things that come out of firing mid-season, then it becomes a question of which "goods"/"bads" outweigh which "bads"/"goods"...

...and I think it's rare that the "goods" of a mid-season firing outweigh the "bads".

GrayEagle · September 16, 2010

I wouldn't consider firing Dodge until he sustains his sixth loss.

aztecskin · September 16, 2010

I wouldn't consider firing Dodge until he sustains his sixth loss.

I'm pretty sure RV has already considered it. I agree with BeatNavy's point on Good v Bad. It really depends on the situation. If Papa Dodge is really such a stand up guy with all kinds of respect for whatever then maybe he resigns after it is no longer possible to complete the goal. That would be ideal.

Dodge: "I'd like to thank Rick Villareal, the University, etc. .. for allowing me to have the opportunity to coach at such a great place as North Texas. I've enjoyed my time here and can honestly say that we've tried to do something great here. Unfortunately we didn't accomplish everything we set out to do. I am proud of my accomplishments here but it is time for me to step down and allow someone else to lead this program. I believe in this University, the fans, the supporters and I expect great things for North Texas in the future."

If not that, then maybe he does an 'I'll step down at the end of the season type thing'

untgirl has a good point also. The head coach has many responsibilities and Dodge has fulfilled most of them. Just not the most important (to us).

forevereagle · September 16, 2010

Frankly, I am at the point where I don't care if he is fired mid-season. If you do fire him, he doesn't get to finish. End of story, no more. I don't think it helps anyone to have a coach out there who is out the door. I don't think Dodge would do anything that would be a problem, but I just don't like the idea of him having the chance.

All About UNT · September 16, 2010

Reasons as to why I am optimistic

1.) Army barely got a Win over on E. Michigan (31-27)....who I wouldn't mind us playing any day of the week. If Army is so scary...I believe they should have blown them out of the water. EMU got beaten the next week (28-21) by Miami (OH) who absolutely stinks as well.

2.) Rice only put 106 yds rushing on us....truly not that bad. Clemson on the other hand had over 200 yds...but combine that first drive with the fact that they have stellar RBs in place...and that is to be expected. If Army is a rushing offense...I say let them come. Our defense has improved even since Clemson...and I am sure that trend will continue.

3.) Lance and Thompson will perform. With EMU putting 285 Rushing yards against Army with two middle of the road running backs. With both Dunbar and Hamilton healthy...I believe it is not out of line to put an average 7 yds a carry against Army when EMU put up 6 ypc. Thompson will come out looking to make plays and earn his keep. I fully expect him to put 200+ yds passing on Army...combined with another 30-40 rushing.

4.) Hamilton Hamilton Hamilton.....the guy has only had 7 carries and posts 58 yds rushing (8.3 ypc). Army expects Dunbar but they will not be expecting a dual Running Back scenario...I hope that Coach C has considered this option. Either way...give the ball to Hamilton and let him show his stuff as well. I would anticipate nothing less than 300 yds Rushing this game. If you don't think that the dual RB scenario is effective then look at EMU's stats for Rushing against Army.

4.) Atterberry- He has got to know that last weeks short punt can cost us games. He is booting almost 43 yds each punt but I expect that average to go over 50 this game. He knows that what he does effects the outcomes of games and we saw him kicking 50-65 yd punts all offseason.

5.) Absence of playing Riley of 3rd and 2 scenarios....Coach C had better have learned his lesson because it is one we can all agree on.

6.) Last but not least....Revenge. Not a great way to win a game but it sure gets people hyped up. Anyone at Army will tell you that UNT had outplayed them last year. 5 turnovers including 3 INTs by Riley cost us the game...plain and simple. The 1st INT resulted in a FG (D held em to a 35 yd drive)...the last INT was our last drive and last shot at redemption.

Reasons we lose

1.) Turnovers- Hawaii fumbled a kickoff return at their own 24 yd line right after Army had a nice long scoring drive. This of course resulted in a TD almost immediately...the score is 21-21. Right after that??? The very next Hawaii possession on the second play.. Army sacks Hawaii's QB at the Hawaii 11 Yard Line. Of course Army scores again..now 28-21. Needless to say Hawaii gets their act together and closes it out. The point? Some commentators have said that Hawaii's defense got tired out but I am sorry when the ball is fumbled at the 24 and then the 11 yard line...what can you expect your defense to do? Those two errors cost 14 points and half of Army's score. This game should have ended 31-14 Hawaii but it didn't. Army seems to either be very skilled in forcing turnovers or gets very lucky about where they occur. EM

Rudy · September 16, 2010

I disagree completely. None of them should be considered as replacements. The both have done nothing to warrant HC consideration. This is a critical transition in terms of our athletic department and every move will be critical to future movement in realignment, perception, fanbase etc. RV must go after a proven commodity and somebody people know and identify with. This program has been such a dump the last 5 years that it needs something fresh quickly.

I think we have to wait to see how conference starts. If we can at least win in conference and turn the corner, Dodge may be able to keep his job. If he can't, then one of the Coordinators should be brought in as an interim HC the last few games of the season, and conduct your search for a new HC.

ParksAndRecRick · September 17, 2010

Why do you start this stuff? Why not putting your energy and excitement into the positive.....like UNT beating Army?

Lurker · September 17, 2010

The actual quote was from Dodge and it was "Six wins won't get it done." There is, however, no direct indication that 7 games is a mandate from the AD, or if that is simply the bar that Dodge believe he must clear in order to see this season as a success.

To the point - if we have a 12 game season, that means until we've lost 5 games, the possibility of winning 7 still remains. If there IS a deal in place, you ABSOLUTELY don't fire the man until the deal is unreachable.

While firing the coach mid season might satisfy some fans who are looking to gnaw on raw meat, the disruption to the team and the message that sends to the players, especially the seniors who have played for this man since they were Freshman, who CAME HERE to play for him, is not the message we should be sending. A choice was made last year to give Dodge the full 4 years to make it happen. Even if you know he's not going to return after the 5th game of the season, you let the man finish his season, say good-bye to his players.

We may look back and see Todd Dodge as a poor football coach, but I believe the VAST majority here feel that he has done a lot of good for the program, even if it hasn't translated to the number of wins we all want to see, and the University should treat him with respect even if it is in his release. ...he may return to being the winningest high-school coach in the state. No need to create bad blood. No need to burn a bridge.

TD's quote on a recent WBAP morning interview was "I've been told I have to win 7 games." He knows even if some choose think otherwise. That doesn't mean it written down somewhere, but TD seems to think that is the rule.

That being said - you don't fire him after the Army if it is a loss. At first I thought that should mean fire him after loss number 6, but at 6 and 6, UNT could still make it to a bowl. So do you wait for loss #7 - and carefully monitor requests for bids to UNT vendors on all-black unis?

Edited September 17, 2010 by Lurker

Side Show Joe · September 17, 2010

I agree completely that Dodge should be given every opportunity to win his 7 games. That's the deal he was promised, and even if the losses are frustrating, I believe Dodge should have the opportunity to try. However, I think it may be in the University's and football program's best interest to let Dodge go in the middle of the season if 6 wins becomes unattainable. (I say 6 wins because I could see RV giving Dodge another year with 6 wins, even if the deal is for 7 - especially with the injuries and some close losses.)

I am advocating a mid-season coaching change if necessary partially based on the debacle we had with Dickey. I'm in no way suggesting Dodge would march the team out in black uniforms - I believe he's a classy guy with integrity. However, I think it would be very difficult for the players and coaches if Dodge were to become a lame duck. You'd have a lot of challenges with conflicting loyalties, and I think it would really hurt our recruiting. If Dodge is let go during the season, it allows the University to start the new coaching search sooner and get someone in as quickly as possible. Since Dodge had to deal with a considerably shortened recruiting season during his first year (I know, it was partially of his own doing), I think he might even agree. All this being said... I really hope Dodge is able to pull it out and bring us some wins to finish out Fouts.

I agree with most of what you are posting, but a 6 win season needs to be closely examined. All 6 wins seasons are not equal. If one of those 6 wins is over Kansas State, and another is over Army, then ok, I'd say maybe we bring him back. But if we end the year with 6 wins and they are all over bad teams like those ranked lower then 110 in the FBS, then we need to find a new coach.

I hope Dodge can get us 7 wins. I'm pulling for him.

untgirl04 · September 17, 2010

I agree with most of what you are posting, but a 6 win season needs to be closely examined. All 6 wins seasons are not equal. If one of those 6 wins is over Kansas State, and another is over Army, then ok, I'd say maybe we bring him back. But if we end the year with 6 wins and they are all over bad teams like those ranked lower then 110 in the FBS, then we need to find a new coach.

I hope Dodge can get us 7 wins. I'm pulling for him.

I agree with you that not all 6 win seasons are created equal. If we went 2-2 in OOC play and were bowl eligible, I think it would be difficult to justify firing Dodge, even if the mandate was 7. Personally, I'd just rather see us win out so we don't have to rehash these questions after every game.

Side Show Joe · September 18, 2010

I agree with you that not all 6 win seasons are created equal. If we went 2-2 in OOC play and were bowl eligible, I think it would be difficult to justify firing Dodge, even if the mandate was 7. Personally, I'd just rather see us win out so we don't have to rehash these questions after every game.

I totally agree.

shaft · September 18, 2010

TD should be given the chance to get to 6 wins in his 4th season.

That's means by week 8 we should make the announcement Dodge won't be back has head coach, and we can in the new guy in here by the second week of December.

VideoEagle · September 18, 2010

Just because DD was fired during the season is no reason to suggest Dodge should be. That makes absolutely no sense, especially if you think DD should not have been fired during he season. If you think Dickey shouldn't have been fired you can't possibly logically conclude Dodge should be.

Poor Dickey insulted every fan, student and supporter of the team. Often. Repeatedly. I talked to him personally after calling anyone who was a fan of the program a f****r. He told me I wasn't in that group. But, I was and I knew I was because he insulted anyone who was a fan and gave money to the program. He didn't grasp the concept that insulting the fan base meant he insulted the entire fan base.

I still think it was a terrible mistake to fire him during the season as we got such terrible publicity at the time. But today, people just look at his record and they say we fired a clearly, unquestionably failed coach. I still think it would be a terrible mistake to fire Dodge in the middle of the season.

I know Dodge has enough personal integrity to avoid an end of the season embarrassment to the university like Dickey pulled.

Edited September 18, 2010 by VideoEagle