Hated Rivals

[Censored by Laurie]

Late to the party...has wind power been mentioned? I really hate wind power.

[TodgeRodge]

Late to the party...has wind power been mentioned? I really hate wind power.

there would be a "green" aspect to the plan I have.....wind and some solar....it would be for a specific aspect of the plan and would have a research and potential donor/sponsor focus

[FloMoGrad]

TR, while you seem to be bitching about a lot of the same things we have and will continue to do so on, it's the manner in which you go about it that ruffles the feathers.

There is an elitist attitude the permeates everything SMU does, anyone living in Dallas/Ft Worth can attest. I tend to like UNT and chose UNT over SMU for a number of reasons, but fellow students had a lot to do with it.

I will agree that constant turnover at the top has the potential for some serious negative consequences in the near future. However, I expect to see those consequences more on the academic/administrative side, and less on the Athletic Department, since we have had stability within that department for nearly a decade. RV has a plan, and while it may not be the overarching Mein Kampf you're looking for, he's already shown an ability to raise funds, improve facilities, increase budgets and add positions to the department.

One look at the ticket pricing options and you'll surely see that the tides of UNT FB are changing.

[Yellow Snow]

1. have a plan but it is difficult to articulate on a message board....I am 99% sure most on here would mock it mainly because it came from me and also because they would not like some of the associations and they would not see the synergies of some of the parts of the plan.....they would not like how long it would take and they would probably not like the fact that it was dealing with getting groups from dozens to hundreds maybe a few per game and maybe a dozen total of those year in and year out.....it would not be anything that would just all at one time get 5,000 more to show up......it would be something that over 10 or so years built a core of several thousand new fans many without a past association to the university and the hope each of them would bring a guest or two to a couple of games a year.....it would require the cooperation of the entire university, a dozen or more departments, every college or school, the REC center, UNT performance arts, the grant writing and research support group and on and on.....it would probably at first require UNT fans and students to have a thick skin about some of the associated businesses....and no it is not anything perverse or profane it is something the DFW metromess is based upon, it is not that exciting or "sexy" (shout out to sexytime), and I am pretty sure it would be easy to discount and hard to get traction at first...it would also require a great deal of monitoring and data gathering and "sales" from the athletics department and the willingness of athletics to pay students of certain departments some small wage to do internships towards those "information and sales" goals and it would require the cooperation of those departments....it would require a council of research leaders from the academic side to work with athletics to take advantage of all hoped for synergies from the denia area facilities......it would require political pull to arrange state dollars to be leveraged to help obtain private dollars and it would require a lot of scatter shooting with creative grant writing with a % hoped return to improve the denia facilities to further be able to market them and to build the synergies to finally sell a total package that would be attractive to long term sponsors about what investing in UNT and UNT athletics would be able to do for them financially.....anywhere from 200K at the cheapest end with a lot of volunteer effort and a LONG see 10+ year vision BEFORE there is a real big time payout and things really start to come together......2 million up front might get you to where 7 years and a hell of a lot of work gets a smaller time payout that could be leveraged in a couple of years for a larger payout.......if one or two things clicked it could be quicker...all that for again about 5K additional hard core fans at the end of the time and perhaps 2-5 million in additional, unencumbered, yearly, private, athletics support over and above any additional tickets concessions or parking and hopefully 5 to 7 million in research and academic programming support

2. the issue I have is that UNT does not have and has not had stable leadership to even begin to work on whatever plan they might want (if any)......and with the current hire......I see more instability and another change in leadership and possibly in direction much too soon for a university that needs long term stable leadership

3. I would have positively been a better president than at least 2 out of the last 4.....and if I was the last one before VLR I would still be there after a heated confrontation that involved myself, faculty, and students confronting the chancellor and eventually him losing a power struggle and being let go with no golden parachute and a swift kick in the ass back to dallas

when you have turnover at the top, others higher up with alternate agendas, the lack of ability to have anyone that can step up when needed at critical times and fully explain and support how you are going to build and fund new facilities....or when the construction will start.....or when it will finish......or what future budget projections look like......or what future fund raising goals will be.....or the expected time frame to meet those goals......it is easy for a conference that has multiple universities to choose from to make the choice for another school that has clearly written, well defined goals and expectations that have firm dates and times as to when particular things will happen

Holy Stephen King…

I was thinking more along the lines of this plan:

1. Get every season ticket holder to donate at least $100.00 in addition to their ticket purchase. How many season ticket holders are there? Seems simple enough. Hundred bucks over the course of the year or one lump sum. Encourage everybody to give more, but push initially for $100.00. I don’t know how donations and season ticket seating is prioritized at UNT, but at I-State that was revamped. Donation requirements for the best seating sections were raised; press box suites were sold… basically a full re-index of the stadium. People had to up their donation or move to a different section commiserate with their donor level. Most ponied up with more money.

2. Create a kid friendly “section” of the tailgate area or part of the stadium. Offer discounted season tickets and family packs for this area/section. At I-State we have the “little ‘Clone Zone”. Kids get to meet the players, have carnival like games (ring toss, etc.) for I-State merchandise, their ticket stub gets them a free hot dog and coke, etc… Things like this make it easier for younger alumni with little kids to make it to the games. It serves as sort of a Cyclone daycare. Kids love it. Parents that maybe have little interest in the game are willing to come out with the kids while the interested party (dad) gets to watch the game.

3. Create season ticket mini-packs. Once the base season ticket holders get their seats, offer three game mini-packs. Seats that are unsold for the full season can be offered at a slight discount for groups of three games. That way people that don’t or can’t commit to the full season have an option other than single game tickets (good for groups of people that want to sit together but they all can’t make every game).

I don’t think there needs to be an extravagant 12 year Marshall plan. The whole deal is remarkably simple.

[Cerebus]

What?!?!

You people don't hate MTSU anymore?

We're Better than the SBC? Hicks for Heisman? The cheap shots on JaMel Branch?

[Rudy]

[TodgeRodge]

Holy Stephen King…

I was thinking more along the lines of this plan:

1. Get every season ticket holder to donate at least $100.00 in addition to their ticket purchase. How many season ticket holders are there? Seems simple enough. Hundred bucks over the course of the year or one lump sum. Encourage everybody to give more, but push initially for $100.00. I don’t know how donations and season ticket seating is prioritized at UNT, but at I-State that was revamped. Donation requirements for the best seating sections were raised; press box suites were sold… basically a full re-index of the stadium. People had to up their donation or move to a different section commiserate with their donor level. Most ponied up with more money.

2. Create a kid friendly “section” of the tailgate area or part of the stadium. Offer discounted season tickets and family packs for this area/section. At I-State we have the “little ‘Clone Zone”. Kids get to meet the players, have carnival like games (ring toss, etc.) for I-State merchandise, their ticket stub gets them a free hot dog and coke, etc… Things like this make it easier for younger alumni with little kids to make it to the games. It serves as sort of a Cyclone daycare. Kids love it. Parents that maybe have little interest in the game are willing to come out with the kids while the interested party (dad) gets to watch the game.

3. Create season ticket mini-packs. Once the base season ticket holders get their seats, offer three game mini-packs. Seats that are unsold for the full season can be offered at a slight discount for groups of three games. That way people that don’t or can’t commit to the full season have an option other than single game tickets (good for groups of people that want to sit together but they all can’t make every game).

I don’t think there needs to be an extravagant 12 year Marshall plan. The whole deal is remarkably simple.

ISU is already in the Big 12.....though where after that is an unknown.....I would hope your AD and university admins have a long term plan to address that issue

ISU is a land grant school in a state that only has 3 public universities.....there the same number of D1-A programs in the dfw metromess as there are in the entire state of Iowa......plus all the pro sports.....North Texas is a Normal College (like UNI) and after that they they still stuck with arts and liberal arts for the most part until about the last 2 decades

ISU has been a member of a major conference for decades

ISU can bring 40K+ fans to their stadium consistently

kids growing up in Iowa have 3 public universities to choose from....kids in Texas have 30+ public universities to choose from

3 public universities play D1-A ball in Iowa......in a couple of years 12 will in Texas

in short a bounce house and a better Dot race is not going to cut it to draw in the DFW metro area fans or to capture the attention of many others

[Eagle-96]

What?!?!

You people don't hate MTSU anymore?

We're Better than the SBC? Hicks for Heisman? The cheap shots on JaMel Branch?

I too have a healthy disdain for all things Muts and Raider. I just got sidetracked with the HodgePodge buffonery.

BTW: That was more along the lines of aggrevated assault as opposed to a cheap shot on Branch. But it sure was sssssssseeeeeexxxxxyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.

[untjim1995]

TodgeRodge (CheckFacts) brings me back to the days of LOYALFAN on gmg.com. These posters have become the best rolls of all time on gmg.com. You all would do yourself a favor and realize that this poster just happens to post ALWAYS about topics that will get lots of looks and replies.

BTW, nice troll on the SMU/UNT/SWC case. I always love reading the "SMU didn't have anything to do with us not getting into the SWC or CUSA argument" because Hayden Fry said so in his book. I mean there is just no way that Hayden Fry would protect any of his friends from SMU by saying this, right? He did coach there for a long time before North Texas called him to Denton. Seriously, just ignore almost every SMU fan who knowingly brings up the fact that they blackballed us twice and will continue to do so in the future.

Man, you are a good fisherman--even I got hooked knowing that your bait was just sitting there waiting to be bitten. For everyone else reading this, don't get hooked. IGNORE THIS TROLL!!

[foutsrouts]

3 public universities play D1-A ball in Iowa......in a couple of years 12 will in Texas

The troll claims to be an expert on football in the State of Iowa, yet he doesn't even know how many schools play "D1A" (FBS) football there. Worthless nonsense.

[LongJim]

I think I'm going to go with MTSU and Troy as teams I want to see UNT beat in the SBC more than any other.

They are too big for their britches, AFAIC.

Edited December 6, 2010 by LongJim

[Varsity]

UNT has an obvious hated rival: UNT.

We have met the enemy and he is us.

[Got5onIt]

UNT has an obvious hated rival: UNT.

We have met the enemy and he is us.

That's a cool sig. Where did you get it? I love the vintage look it has.

Edited December 6, 2010 by Got5onIt

[NT80]

The troll claims to be an expert on football in the State of Iowa, yet he doesn't even know how many schools play "D1A" (FBS) football there. Worthless nonsense.

That troll claims to be an expert on everything...

[greenminer]

There is nothing in this thread that can't be resolved by a win over Troy.

Fuzzys Tacos would help, too.

[Primo]

Todge... why write so much... be concise and maybe some folks will actually read your post...

You know - more to the point... less fluff... unless, uh, well, unless you are a fluffer... then excuse me...

Still dislike SMU... but I forgot Troy... oh and take LeTourneau off my list, but add Strayer...

fluffer

[Hunter Green]

Lee Frikin Jackson

[Varsity]

That's a cool sig. Where did you get it? I love the vintage look it has.

Thank you. I made it. You're welcome to use it if you like, I change em all the time.

[Green Mean]

UNT needs a clear, long term plan, from the very upper echelons of the leadership chain with defined goals and the expectations of when and how they will be met....I have concerns that UNT does not have that in place and will not have that in place for a long while and during that gap in creation of, and total university implementation of, that plan (if ever) UNT will miss yet more chances to advance their position for the future....I also feel that missing that move in the future will probably be the last chance to catch a ride on the train UNT wants to be on and the results will be that UNT is on a different path for the long term....period

I expressed those concerns in a now disappeared thread about the current president being put into place......and that thread was removed and I was banned for about 3 weeks from posting

GMG prefers to discuss things in the form of...

+1

gagree

I've always enjoyed your discussions as you have always made some decent points. However, in the last 10-15 years you still don't think UNT has a plan? Have you glanced over the Mean Green Village master plan that was done years ago about what the future could be? We're pretty much a baseball stadium away from it being fully completed. Does the new AC do anything for you? New football stadium? Enjoying positive success in mens basketball? New proven HC with higher salary? Yet you have the nerve to say that there is no commitment to athletics?

What about from a school level? New business bldg? New science buildings? New research park to get our standards up to tier 1 and make our research spread globally? New dorms being built? New health center? And not to mention the many more things that will come to UNT in the next decade and beyond.

My point is that none of the things I stated above just come out of somebody's ass. They all take or took planning and it all somehow got done and even more improvements will be happening. Yet again you say there is absolutely no clear leadership at UNT. I won't deny that we have had our battles and still continue to do so but it doesn't happen overnight. If we didn't have an administration that wasn't committed I can guarantee you that none of this would have been possible. No plan EVER goes exactly the way they anticipated.

I think you are underselling UNT very short because in the last 10 years this school has made a huge transformation. It still has work to do but if you don't see the hope many of us do then I don't know what to say.

[Aquila_Viridis]

Main actual Rival: overly limp tortillas

Should be Rivals: Houston and to much lesser extent Memphis, also Louisiana in Lafayette if they can get rid of turkey little brother and properly call themselves THE University of Louisana (we must all hate LSU for this), also SO Miss yes and LA Tech

Should not be Rivals: TXSt (should be changed to UT-SM), UTSA (please have pride), UTA (should be UNT-A) hey don't forget SFA (should be AM-Nac), SH (AM-Hunt), Angelo (TT-SanAng), Sul Ross (cede to Mexico), AM Comm (UNT-Comm), UTT (AM-T), TJC, Kilgore there's a whole new conference for some of you guys

Dishonorable mention Rival: Northeast Golden Gobblers (the fact they can even be mentioned is a point of shame, notwithstanding swamp on campus) WAC is looking, maybe if they go there LA Tech will join Belch.

Potential but not really when you think about it Rivals: stAte, Troy, UTEP (should be TT-EP and join WAC)

Ghost of the past Rival: NMSU sad, good rival for TTEP though

We have a ways to go but should do a Tyson on them Rivals: TT (once they actually put tax dollars to work and perform a function by administering the other state schools in west Texas we can catch them), SMU (after they are sufficiently scorned by TCU)

[runt96]

Main actual Rival: overly limp tortillas

Should be Rivals: Houston and to much lesser extent Memphis, also Louisiana in Lafayette if they can get rid of turkey little brother and properly call themselves THE University of Louisana (we must all hate LSU for this), also SO Miss yes and LA Tech

Should not be Rivals: TXSt (should be changed to UT-SM), UTSA (please have pride), UTA (should be UNT-A) hey don't forget SFA (should be AM-Nac), SH (AM-Hunt), Angelo (TT-SanAng), Sul Ross (cede to Mexico), AM Comm (UNT-Comm), UTT (AM-T), TJC, Kilgore there's a whole new conference for some of you guys

Dishonorable mention Rival: Northeast Golden Gobblers (the fact they can even be mentioned is a point of shame, notwithstanding swamp on campus) WAC is looking, maybe if they go there LA Tech will join Belch.

Potential but not really when you think about it Rivals: stAte, Troy, UTEP (should be TT-EP and join WAC)

Ghost of the past Rival: NMSU sad, good rival for TTEP though

We have a ways to go but should do a Tyson on them Rivals: TT (once they actually put tax dollars to work and perform a function by administering the other state schools in west Texas we can catch them), SMU (after they are sufficiently scorned by TCU)

Like it, maybe SMU can become TCU-Dallas or better yet UNT-Dallas-II

[Rudy]

Stadium Nazis.

[TodgeRodge]

I've always enjoyed your discussions as you have always made some decent points. However, in the last 10-15 years you still don't think UNT has a plan? Have you glanced over the Mean Green Village master plan that was done years ago about what the future could be? We're pretty much a baseball stadium away from it being fully completed. Does the new AC do anything for you? New football stadium? Enjoying positive success in mens basketball? New proven HC with higher salary? Yet you have the nerve to say that there is no commitment to athletics?

What about from a school level? New business bldg? New science buildings? New research park to get our standards up to tier 1 and make our research spread globally? New dorms being built? New health center? And not to mention the many more things that will come to UNT in the next decade and beyond.

My point is that none of the things I stated above just come out of somebody's ass. They all take or took planning and it all somehow got done and even more improvements will be happening. Yet again you say there is absolutely no clear leadership at UNT. I won't deny that we have had our battles and still continue to do so but it doesn't happen overnight. If we didn't have an administration that wasn't committed I can guarantee you that none of this would have been possible. No plan EVER goes exactly the way they anticipated.

I think you are underselling UNT very short because in the last 10 years this school has made a huge transformation. It still has work to do but if you don't see the hope many of us do then I don't know what to say.

1. where did I say UNT had no commitment to athletics?

2. the things you listed while nice.....are singular pieces....sure there was a "plan" for the denia area......but it was clearly not well defined and not long term when first implemented because if it had been there would have been a firm plan for the stadium portion of that area before the AC was built.....not after it was built and then scrapping that stadium plan and going with another.....if there had been a plan there would have been a firm date in place to start stadium construction when the AC was being built......not several years of next to no real news about the stadium, what it would cost, how it would be paid for, what it would hold, and when it would start being built.......you do remember those years of discussion on this forum don't you.......when long term highly vocal UNT athletics supporters were growing extremely restless because they say nothing being done on any of that.....there was a website with a couple of small conception drawings and that was not even how the stadium ended up being......they built the AC before they even knew if they were going to get student approval on the athletics fee.......you do remember the single largest athletics donor for UNT publicly stating he had tossed in the towel because of lack of progress and because of lack of communication about what the plans and progress were......this was a very wealthy (though unfortunately probably declining in wealth) NON-UNT AFFILIATED donor that had written checks for over a million in the past.....he was the one that got the ball rolling on the stadium design......you do remember him walking away from that don't you.......many would blame that on RV.....I can see why....I personally blame it on the fact that RV repeatedly became tired of making a statement with the full support of the UNT administration......and then after publicly hanging it all out there.....he had the rug pulled from under him with a change in direction......so RV finally just stopped making those statements until something was finally agreed upon

3. the Business building, Bio building, are nothing more than a product of student growth and state formula funding....it was not because of any long term plan or alumni support or anything else....it was just the bare min that all public schools get when their enrollment allows them an increase in formula funding for buildings and infrastructure.....how long was that business building in the plans for......how many incarnations did it go through before something was finally done

hell have posted a link in the past from a high level UNT meeting that UNT considered using the old Radisson Hotel for the college business....I believe it was from 2008 which was a couple of years after they had been talking about a new business building

'''http://www.unt.edu/president/features/Strategic Planning/Strategic Plan for UNT Facilities.doc'''''

(you will probably have to cut and paste into your browser and a .doc will open)

there is the link...it is a 5 year plan.....in this "plan" they talk about a new business building by 2008 for 50 million.....then further down they talk about possibly needing the Radisson to put the college of business in

Purchase Radisson Hotel and Conference Center

gggggg. Need: This property is needed if the College of Business is located at Eagle Point and the School of Hospitality and Merchandising moves to the Radisson building

hhhhhh. Cost: $7,000,000

iiiiii. Schedule: June 2005

jjjjjj. Status: Requires Board reapproval, TRB for College of Business and willing sellers

how many of the things on that list are done......how many were even started before they were suppose to be finished......hell they have wanted to tear down the college inn for 3 decades and I believe it still sits there rotting away.....if they aren't careful some asshat will get it labeled a historic landmark and it will stay forever and ever

again look at all those things and the dates and times and then look at what was actually done....not a lot of following the plan going on

4. the research park was over priced they should have been able to get TI to donate that property instead of paying more than anyone else public or private was willing to pay for it.....the faculty in the programs located at the research park hate being out there, it divides academic programs off the main campus which I am against because I believe a college experience is a collection of experiences not just a list of classes you take and when a program is off the main campus it takes away from that experience......which is why I and many will always frown on online degrees in all but a few subjects and for all but a few people (like those that need a piece of paper to move up in an existing job)......the research park is woefully underutilized and again there is no clear plan for it

5. the dorms are nice, but many of them have been built with private money and are privately managed and that has lead to some student dissatisfaction with those dorms and I believe UNT had to step in and take over the management of at least one if not two of them to help clear it up

in the last 10 years what I have seen UNT do is play a large game of catch up to get to the base level of universities that UNT considers themselves similar to.....while those universities also continued to move ahead

http://www.dentonrc.com/s/dws/img/drc/04-10/0402untstrategic.pdf

here.....another plan from April 2010 (although now we hear one of the main things that VLR will do is make a new plan and incorporate parts of a bunch of old plans into this new plan)......so at least UNT has a plan plan!.....now if only had confidence the new guy would stay around to actually implement the plan or that UNT would be able to land a real leader in the future when their job will be to implement someone elses plan.....or maybe they will make a new plan

lets investigate the plan above

basically it wants to realign a bunch arts and liberal arts type programs and take the savings from that to increase research.....when The State of Texas formula funding for faculty positions does not fund arts and liberal arts programs at near the level that it funds engineering, pharmacy, and STEM programs......which means UNT will see very little increase in state dollars to help them move faculty lines from arts and liberal arts over to STEM programs....which means you will be trying to hire STEM faculty with huge start up needs based on liberal arts and arts funding......which has very small start up needs

they have been talking to the ARL for 2 years about how to become a member....but they make no mention of where or how the money will be found to do that.....the goal is 2015

right on page 51 it clearly states that the THECB required goal of 400 million in endowment IS NOT FEASIBLE in the next 5 years......then from the time line laid out it does not seem feasible in 10 years from now....in fact barely half of the THECB requirement is feasible for UNT in the next 10 years......why is that......why can't UNT get their endowment TEN YEARS FROM NOW to the level UTD is at today......much less that Texas Tech has raised 600 million over the last 7 years and plans to raise 400 million over the next 3......while not all of that goes right to the endowment a great deal of it will.....and the Tech and UH endowments are currently twice the amount that UNT has plans for theirs to be IN ANOTHER 10 YEARS

basically the goal for UNT from this "plan" is to go from the same endowment as TxState today (about 90 million) and over 10 years they will just barely double it to 215 million......which will still be 185 million short of the goals for the "tier 1" funding......true there are 6 criteria and only 4 of the 6 need to be met in addition to meeting the 45 million in research......but I find it impossible that UNT will make that initial and "must be met" 45 million in research when their plan is to shift liberal arts and arts faculty lines to STEM lines......and when their plan is to raise paltry amounts of external dollars to do so.....because Texas does not fund research faculty positions.....they don't fund half time faculty that can spend their other time on research.....and they don't fund start up cost for research faculty, and they don't fund graduate students all that well to actually do the heavy lifting

look at the first "plan" I posted......look at the time lines, the fact that so many were MISSED or have not even been started, look at the second plan I posted.....not even a year old......and being tossed out.....along with the leader that oversaw it.....look at the "goals" if you can even call most of them that.....look at the total lack of discussion about where and how the money will be made available and look at where UNT stands today compared to the other 6 emerging research universities and then look at where UNT expects to be in 10 years from now.....basically in 10 years from now UNT is still planning to be well behind UH, UTD, and Tech in any and all "tier 1" goals and metrics and basically UNT plans to be about where UH, Tech, and UTD are TODAY on many of those goals.....and that is 5 or ten years from now......and they "plan" on getting there with less external dollars than those universities are availing themselves of TODAY

forgive me if I am a bit underwhelmed and if I believe I have seen much of this before.....shifting plans, unmet deadlines, lack of acceptance that outside fund raising is critical for university advancement, lack of understanding that moving faculty lines around especially from arts and liberal arts to STEM programs is hard to do and leaves you in a funding pinch to get quality STEM faculty.....talk of adding programs that are not a good match with the overall university like a Pharmacology program or Bio Engineering when UNT is associated with a OSTEOPATHIC (holistic primary care) hospital not a medical research hospital....and UNT woefully under funds their engineering programs as it is......and is considering folding one.....that they cut once in the past because it was not going to be ABET accredited....then they opened it back up again in the ETEC department......only to just recently talk about folding it again.....because it will not obtain ABET accrediation

the progress that UNT has made came on the backs of enrollment increases and enrollment increases are only going to allow UNT to progress at the same level they are at today.....not to ADVANCE.....and I see nothing in the plan (that is about to be scrapped for a new one) that tells me UNT is going to do anything, but try and shift a few dollars around here and there and cross their fingers

Edited December 7, 2010 by TodgeRodge

[UNTLifer]

1. where did I say UNT had no commitment to athletics?

2. the things you listed while nice.....are singular pieces....sure there was a "plan" for the denia area......but it was clearly not well defined and not long term when first implemented because if it had been there would have been a firm plan for the stadium portion of that area before the AC was built.....not after it was built and then scrapping that stadium plan and going with another.....if there had been a plan there would have been a firm date in place to start stadium construction when the AC was being built......not several years of next to no real news about the stadium, what it would cost, how it would be paid for, what it would hold, and when it would start being built.......you do remember those years of discussion on this forum don't you.......when long term highly vocal UNT athletics supporters were growing extremely restless because they say nothing being done on any of that.....there was a website with a couple of small conception drawings and that was not even how the stadium ended up being......they built the AC before they even knew if they were going to get student approval on the athletics fee.......you do remember the single largest athletics donor for UNT publicly stating he had tossed in the towel because of lack of progress and because of lack of communication about what the plans and progress were......this was a very wealthy (though unfortunately probably declining in wealth) NON-UNT AFFILIATED donor that had written checks for over a million in the past.....he was the one that got the ball rolling on the stadium design......you do remember him walking away from that don't you.......many would blame that on RV.....I can see why....I personally blame it on the fact that RV repeatedly became tired of making a statement with the full support of the UNT administration......and then after publicly hanging it all out there.....he had the rug pulled from under him with a change in direction......so RV finally just stopped making those statements until something was finally agreed upon

3. the Business building, Bio building, are nothing more than a product of student growth and state formula funding....it was not because of any long term plan or alumni support or anything else....it was just the bare min that all public schools get when their enrollment allows them an increase in formula funding for buildings and infrastructure.....how long was that business building in the plans for......how many incarnations did it go through before something was finally done

hell have posted a link in the past from a high level UNT meeting that UNT considered using the old Radisson Hotel for the college business....I believe it was from 2008 which was a couple of years after they had been talking about a new business building

'''http://www.unt.edu/president/features/Strategic Planning/Strategic Plan for UNT Facilities.doc'''''

(you will probably have to cut and paste into your browser and a .doc will open)

there is the link...it is a 5 year plan.....in this "plan" they talk about a new business building by 2008 for 50 million.....then further down they talk about possibly needing the Radisson to put the college of business in

Purchase Radisson Hotel and Conference Center

gggggg. Need: This property is needed if the College of Business is located at Eagle Point and the School of Hospitality and Merchandising moves to the Radisson building

hhhhhh. Cost: $7,000,000

iiiiii. Schedule: June 2005

jjjjjj. Status: Requires Board reapproval, TRB for College of Business and willing sellers

how many of the things on that list are done......how many were even started before they were suppose to be finished......hell they have wanted to tear down the college inn for 3 decades and I believe it still sits there rotting away.....if they aren't careful some asshat will get it labeled a historic landmark and it will stay forever and ever

again look at all those things and the dates and times and then look at what was actually done....not a lot of following the plan going on

4. the research park was over priced they should have been able to get TI to donate that property instead of paying more than anyone else public or private was willing to pay for it.....the faculty in the programs located at the research park hate being out there, it divides academic programs off the main campus which I am against because I believe a college experience is a collection of experiences not just a list of classes you take and when a program is off the main campus it takes away from that experience......which is why I and many will always frown on online degrees in all but a few subjects and for all but a few people (like those that need a piece of paper to move up in an existing job)......the research park is woefully underutilized and again there is no clear plan for it

5. the dorms are nice, but many of them have been built with private money and are privately managed and that has lead to some student dissatisfaction with those dorms and I believe UNT had to step in and take over the management of at least one if not two of them to help clear it up

in the last 10 years what I have seen UNT do is play a large game of catch up to get to the base level of universities that UNT considers themselves similar to.....while those universities also continued to move ahead

http://www.dentonrc.com/s/dws/img/drc/04-10/0402untstrategic.pdf

here.....another plan from April 2010 (although now we hear one of the main things that VLR will do is make a new plan and incorporate parts of a bunch of old plans into this new plan)......so at least UNT has a plan plan!.....now if only had confidence the new guy would stay around to actually implement the plan or that UNT would be able to land a real leader in the future when their job will be to implement someone elses plan.....or maybe they will make a new plan

lets investigate the plan above

basically it wants to realign a bunch arts and liberal arts type programs and take the savings from that to increase research.....when The State of Texas formula funding for faculty positions does not fund arts and liberal arts programs at near the level that it funds engineering, pharmacy, and STEM programs......which means UNT will see very little increase in state dollars to help them move faculty lines from arts and liberal arts over to STEM programs....which means you will be trying to hire STEM faculty with huge start up needs based on liberal arts and arts funding......which has very small start up needs

they have been talking to the ARL for 2 years about how to become a member....but they make no mention of where or how the money will be found to do that.....the goal is 2015

right on page 51 it clearly states that the THECB required goal of 400 million in endowment IS NOT FEASIBLE in the next 5 years......then from the time line laid out it does not seem feasible in 10 years from now....in fact barely half of the THECB requirement is feasible for UNT in the next 10 years......why is that......why can't UNT get their endowment TEN YEARS FROM NOW to the level UTD is at today......much less that Texas Tech has raised 600 million over the last 7 years and plans to raise 400 million over the next 3......while not all of that goes right to the endowment a great deal of it will.....and the Tech and UH endowments are currently twice the amount that UNT has plans for theirs to be IN ANOTHER 10 YEARS

basically the goal for UNT from this "plan" is to go from the same endowment as TxState today (about 90 million) and over 10 years they will just barely double it to 215 million......which will still be 185 million short of the goals for the "tier 1" funding......true there are 6 criteria and only 4 of the 6 need to be met in addition to meeting the 45 million in research......but I find it impossible that UNT will make that initial and "must be met" 45 million in research when their plan is to shift liberal arts and arts faculty lines to STEM lines......and when their plan is to raise paltry amounts of external dollars to do so.....because Texas does not fund research faculty positions.....they don't fund half time faculty that can spend their other time on research.....and they don't fund start up cost for research faculty, and they don't fund graduate students all that well to actually do the heavy lifting

look at the first "plan" I posted......look at the time lines, the fact that so many were MISSED or have not even been started, look at the second plan I posted.....not even a year old......and being tossed out.....along with the leader that oversaw it.....look at the "goals" if you can even call most of them that.....look at the total lack of discussion about where and how the money will be made available and look at where UNT stands today compared to the other 6 emerging research universities and then look at where UNT expects to be in 10 years from now.....basically in 10 years from now UNT is still planning to be well behind UH, UTD, and Tech in any and all "tier 1" goals and metrics and basically UNT plans to be about where UH, Tech, and UTD are TODAY on many of those goals.....and that is 5 or ten years from now......and they "plan" on getting there with less external dollars than those universities are availing themselves of TODAY

forgive me if I am a bit underwhelmed and if I believe I have seen much of this before.....shifting plans, unmet deadlines, lack of acceptance that outside fund raising is critical for university advancement, lack of understanding that moving faculty lines around especially from arts and liberal arts to STEM programs is hard to do and leaves you in a funding pinch to get quality STEM faculty.....talk of adding programs that are not a good match with the overall university like a Pharmacology program or Bio Engineering when UNT is associated with a OSTEOPATHIC (holistic primary care) hospital not a medical research hospital....and UNT woefully under funds their engineering programs as it is......and is considering folding one.....that they cut once in the past because it was not going to be ABET accredited....then they opened it back up again in the ETEC department......only to just recently talk about folding it again.....because it will not obtain ABET accrediation

the progress that UNT has made came on the backs of enrollment increases and enrollment increases are only going to allow UNT to progress at the same level they are at today.....not to ADVANCE.....and I see nothing in the plan (that is about to be scrapped for a new one) that tells me UNT is going to do anything, but try and shift a few dollars around here and there and cross their fingers

Ahh, ol' Check Facts is back at it again.

Brevity is not your strong suit. I have one question, "What is your beef with North Texas?" Prefer the answer to be in 5 sentences or less.

[forevereagle]

Ahh, ol' Check Facts is back at it again.

Brevity is not your strong suit. I have one question, "What is your beef with North Texas?" Prefer the answer to be in 5 sentences or less.

Not gonna happen.