CFN Predicts UNT Will win 2 Lose 10 in 2013

[emmitt01]

"We have...issues"

5-7

4-8

[GoMeanGreen1999]

"You don't have to think he's going to be the next Johnny Manziel, just a significant improvement over any QB we've had since 2004."

Wow. So he's ALREADY better than a QB who set a school record for passing yards against SMU (only to be benched). Already better than Vizza, who we never really got to see mature (debatable whether that was his doing)? Already better than Rodge, a QB so apparently impressive that we dedicated threads to every time he took a job as a grad assistant?

The kid has been lighting up our first team defense in practice. Awesome. We all know just how stingy against the pass they've been. And he must have been houdini to elude our elite pass rush (who weren't even going full speed since it's,you know, practice). "But Mac has been singing his praises!" Benford was singing Coleman's praises in the pre-season. And Chris Jones'. And promising better defense and rebounding. Coach speak aint always the gospel...shocking I know.

But Rivals rated him near Manziel! That's high praise, especially when you consider that it's GMG consensus that Rivals is flawed, biased and a poorer judge of talent than our coaching staff.

I'm not saying Berglund will be a bust. I'm privately hoping he's a superstar. But right now he's got a whole lot of "potential" and nothing else. Anyone else who's been around NT football want to hold the pin on this "potential" grenade for me? The kid has taken exactly as many D1 in-game snaps as you, or me, or my daughter. Sure, all the signs point to his being radically more successful than you or I but some of you are hanging your hats (and your bowl predictions) on "maybe".

Couldn't have said it better.

I understand the points you're making, but I highly doubt it. He's not really on any kind of hot seat going into the season, and our A.D. is not going to be eager to buy out two years of a $500k contract. Only a major scandal gets him fired after this season.

Bingo. He could go 0-12 and he is getting a 4th season.

[Aquila_Viridis]

I don't see much on which to dispute a dire 2-10 prediction. The unfortunate minority of students who show up will eventually find, as we alumni have, that North Texas probably won't change when it comes to athletics. I think some who shape what our school is, find that comedic athletic programs fit their vision for North Texas: a place for people to come who just don't care about the whole school spirit foolishness. Maintaining some profile for the dismal programs allows the programs to serve as a beacon of sorts. A flame for cynical, lazy stoner moths looking for a laugh. To those who think the new stadium is a sign of a commitment to improve athletics, it is much more likely a sign that someone finally became annoyed that the school harbored such an eyesore as the old stadium. They really don't care what happens in the new facility; they are just happy there is a new facility.

[Aquila_Viridis]

Oh and I'm dubbing the flame motif, "A green light to greyness." That is the effect it has had on me.

[Green Crazy]

If he has been doing well against our defense, then I'm optimistic. Not that our defense is great or even real solid, but for him to of been out of games for as long as he has and to be able to do basically what other QBs have been doing means that he's not far from being full speed. Either that, or he's still got some rust and his ceiling is a lot higher than I thought.

Both of these scenarios in my opinion have berglund playing much better than dt was last season.

That being said, with the way sports has been treating us lately...I can see him not playing a down for some insane reason.

Edited February 19, 2013 by Green Crazy

[TIgreen01]

1. I agree 100% with pretty much everything untjim1995 has posted in this thread. The Benford fiasco has, more than anything in our recent past, opened my eyes to the fact that by not firing a flailing head coach, our Administration really has a low bar set for what they want to achieve in athletics. They still have time. If it's not turned around by the end of the Sun Belt tournament (a turnaround would be a miracle at this point), then he should be reassigned/fired after the season is over. Should a miracle not happen and our administration does not act, then they've basically told us all we need to know about their expectations.

2. Everyone is pointing to Berglund as the key....but what about our defensive secondary that was so thin that we couldn't even run a nickel/dime package last season? I think all the extra depth and talent added to our secondary should immediately pay dividends. Granted, we've got a few more pass-happy teams in CUSA than we did in the Sun Belt (so they'll be tested more), but I expect our defense to show big improvement next year.

If this team was playing a Sun Belt schedule next year I'd expect at least a .500 year, and probably more like 7 or 8 wins. The way our CUSA schedule broke for next year means we've got a ridiculously tough away schedule, so I've tempered my expectations accordingly---but 10 losses is not going to happen. We will be better next year than we were this year barring a rash of injuries ala 2010.

Edited February 19, 2013 by TIgreen01

[meangreener]

1. I agree 100% with pretty much everything untjim1995 has posted in this thread. The Benford fiasco has, more than anything in our recent past, opened my eyes to the fact that by not firing a flailing head coach, our Administration really has a low bar set for what they want to achieve in athletics. They still have time. If it's not turned around by the end of the Sun Belt tournament (a turnaround would be a miracle at this point), then he should be reassigned/fired after the season is over. Should a miracle not happen and our administration does not act, then they've basically told us all we need to know about their expectations.

2. Everyone is pointing to Berglund as the key....but what about our defensive secondary that was so thin that we couldn't even run a nickel/dime package last season? I think all the extra depth and talent added to our secondary should immediately pay dividends. Granted, we've got a few more pass-happy teams in CUSA than we did in the Sun Belt (so they'll be tested more), but I expect our defense to show big improvement next year.

If this team was playing a Sun Belt schedule next year I'd expect at least a .500 year, and probably more like 7 or 8 wins. The way our CUSA schedule broke for next year means we've got a ridiculously tough away schedule, so I've tempered my expectations accordingly---but 10 losses is not going to happen. We will be better next year than we were this year barring a rash of injuries ala 2010.

How does the Benford fiasco prove anything? What it proves to me is that RV went all in on a bold move, hiring a young high profile C7 assistant and flopped. If we fire Benford, many more seasons of 5 home games are ahead of us and God forbid Mac implodes we have no money to rid ourselves of him. Once again, we aren't UT. RV is probably on a short leash, but of all his misfires, he's made up for them in other ways.

Our D was good enough to get us to 4-8 and showed off moments of brilliance with a piss poor QB and an absence of wide receivers. What's to make you think that we can't get to 6-6 with an immensely more talented QB and an easier schedule?

Edited February 19, 2013 by meangreener

[TIgreen01]

How does the Benford fiasco prove anything? What it proves to me is that RV went all in on a bold move, hiring a young high profile C7 assistant and flopped. If we fire Benford, many more seasons of 5 home games are ahead of us and God forbid Mac implodes we have no money to rid ourselves of him. Once again, we aren't UT. RV is probably on a short leash, but of all his misfires, he's made up for them in other ways.

Our D was good enough to get us to 4-8 and showed off moments of brilliance with a piss poor QB and an absence of wide receivers. What's to make you think that we can't get to 6-6 with an immensely more talented QB and an easier schedule?

1) I remember an interview of Rick Neuheisel right after he was fired from UCLA. He said that each school's administrators (not the athletic department, mind you, but the BOR, Chancellors, Presidents, etc) decide what level they want to compete at, what kind of success rate they want, then fund their programs accordingly. Some administrations publicly demand one level of success while funding it at another. At the time, UCLA was proclaiming publicly that they should be beating USC, but they were funding their program at far lower levels than USC. It didn't make sense to demand success from the coach when the school wasn't giving him the budget to truly compete. At UNT, we almost never hear any public demands from our administration (and maybe that tells us all we need to know, really). However, we can tell from our budget at what level our admins more or less expect us to compete. If we cannot come up with the buyout money, or some creative solution to get Benford out, it means that our Administration is content with a losing basketball program until the cost of removal reaches their desired level. Obviously they will hope for better returns, but inaction means that $1.2 million is too high a figure to come up with. Relative to what our competition has recently paid for buyouts or salaries, that will show you where they expect us to compete.

2) I've never seen Berglund play. I have no idea just how much better he is than DT, McNulty, etc. However, I have seen what a DMac coached defense looks like over the course of his 30+ year career. I have more faith in his ability to produce better results from our defense when he has a full stable of defensive backs to complement our very good LB corps and improving Dline. I think a dominating defense as the anchor to this team could get us to .500 single handedly. Hell, I lived through the DD years, so I KNOW this to be true. If Berglund gives us a difference maker at QB, that's icing on the cake. I think I'm more or less agreeing with you, no?

Edited February 19, 2013 by TIgreen01

[emmitt01]

How does the Benford fiasco prove anything? What it proves to me is that RV went all in on a bold move, hiring a young high profile C7 assistant and flopped. If we fire Benford, many more seasons of 5 home games are ahead of us and God forbid Mac implodes we have no money to rid ourselves of him. Once again, we aren't UT. RV is probably on a short leash, but of all his misfires, he's made up for them in other ways.

Our D was good enough to get us to 4-8 and showed off moments of brilliance with a piss poor QB and an absence of wide receivers. What's to make you think that we can't get to 6-6 with an immensely more talented QB and an easier schedule?

This "bold move" was a reversal of field from the "Only candidates with head coaching experience will be considered" mantra that he fed us all when we wondered why one of JJ's assistants wasn't being considered. Apparently he meant that only THAT candidate without head coaching experience wouldn't be considered.

And while we're trotting out the tired "we just can't afford it" line that has been a North Texas staple for A LONG LONG TIME (even with changes in budget mind you) ask yourself this question. What is the cost, in both dollars and public faith, of allowing an abject failure of a coach to remain on the bench? All of the people who you've approached, or will approach, about season tickets, donations, MGC memberships, etc are supposed to buy in when there is imperical evidence that we won't hold coaches to an equally high standard? Not only are you not able to sell wins...you're expecting people to "give more...bitch less" in the face of no hope of winning on the horizon? Wow, just wow.

We all get a letter in the mail asking us to renew our MGC membership by a certain date. In fact, we're given "enticements" if we renew early. The athletic department expects us to give support, above and beyond giving up our time and ticket money to attend games. That bar is set and we're asked to reach it every single year. But we should accept that those who are PAID to put a good product on the court/field have some immunity due to budget concerns? Well, this begs some questions for me and they're all inter-related.

1)Who gave these coaches these long term high paying contracts?

2)How was no thought given to the possibility that the hire might not be a home run, if a contract is a virtual marriage in NT's case?

3)If budget truly is the overarching consideration when it comes to coaching changes (and not success for instance) then isn't there someone who is PAID to fundraise and find more folks to but tickets and join the MGC? Or are we leaving this all to our volunteer reps and word of mouth?

4)If we are truly doomed to the catch 22 of "people won't buy in if you don't win and you can't win if people don't buy in" then why are we attempting D1 athletics? Sounds to me like North Texas athletics staffer is the best job on the planet. Failure to produce isn't seen by many because your fanbase is so small...and failure to grow the fanbase is forgiven by those who DO give because...wait for it...you're the victim of financial woes caused by the small fanbase.

Truly only at North Texas.

[KRAM1]

I see Mr. Sunshine has brought his personal rant to the football board. But, since you are here, are the ladies of 911 going to give you time off to play in either or both the Flag Football game or basketball game this year? Does someone need to give you a note or would an extra batch of cookies get you some parole time?

You need to defend your streak...what's a GMG.Com flag football or basketball game with the one and only Emmitt01? Seriously...you really can't break your streak, can you?

[JesseMartin]

I think you guys kind of touched on this but to sort of combine what a lot of the last few posts have said...it's a vicious cycle. With more money, they could do things like buy out contracts, schedule differently, etc...which could lead to more wins, but without better performance in that area, it's hard to solicit more money. Luckily, we are no longer in as poor a position as previously, where donations were discouraged or flat-out refused (as many of us discussed a couple of years back). Actually, with the exception of winning performances from money sports, the entire environment and sphere of involvement, excitement, and spirit has been on a huge upswing in recent years.

On the other hand, though the tone of posts like Emmitt's and Aquila's and others' may seem a bit negative, that doesn't mean they're wrong. There is still much to be done, and it can be frustrating when you see the goals we either have or should have and don't see achievement in certain areas. I would hope that there is less shortsightedness than may seem present at times, and that those in the offices at UNT understand that those same goals are necessary; however, it may be new ideas for solutions that may be what is missing.

Aside from things like personnel issues that are being debated after the fact, what are some long-term ideas for growth of ticket sales, fanbase, revenue increase, etc. that haven't been discussed in an official setting yet? By brainstorming ideas like we've done off-and-on here, but actually putting them together in one package and continuing to submit new ones, we could hit on a couple of gems that get our momentum moving at an even faster pace. Plus, if it's done in coordination with what we do outside of GMG.com, it could be discussed and expanded by the groups we're involved with. So if it comes from Alumni Group A, Student Organization B, and Staff Groups X and Y, then it couldn't be dismissed as "just internet banter".

Just a few thoughts for taking our "issues" to the next level...and possibly, eventually, some real solutions for improvement aside from what has already been tried.