OOC attempt to justify Benford for year 3?

UNT90 · September 13, 2013

I think the question needs to be asked.

Only schedule almost certain wins at home, 5 freakiing games against D2 or lower competition.

They know we are going to get our ass handed to us in conference, so if they can just get Benford to the 13 or 14 win level, they can then talk about improvement over last year, yada yada.

It's all about getting Benford at least to year 3 at this point.

We will never pay out more than one year, much less 3, of a contract at UNT. We just don't care about sports like we do the bottom line.

Just think about this. This team is full of upper classmen, and this is the competition that we choose? We run scared from UTA?

Does anything about this schedule make any kind of sense?

Edited September 13, 2013 by UNT90

GangGreen · September 13, 2013

I think Benturd just wants to see you lose your bet with KRAM. They're probably gonna split it.

UNT90 · September 13, 2013

I think Benturd just wants to see you lose your bet with KRAM. They're probably gonna split it.

Ya, if I knew KRAM was going to talk Benford into tanking the schedule, I woulda made it 13 games or no less than 4 conference wins. ;-)

But with Benford on the Bench, don't count me out yet!

Edited September 13, 2013 by UNT90

Mean Green Scrappy · September 13, 2013

What's the bet? I've been away for awhile.

UNT90 · September 13, 2013

What's the bet? I've been away for awhile.

$50 donation to the Andrew Smith Scholarship fund. I bet Kram we win 10 games or less this year (I post this mainly to remind myself, as I seem to be getting very forgetful).

Little did I know Benford was going to schedule 5 games against D2 schools or lower. At least 2 are exhibitions that won't count toward the total.

KRAM1 · September 13, 2013

What's the bet? I've been away for awhile.

UNT 90 keeps changing the rules on the bet...actually it is $5000.00...and he said less than 10 games...now it's $50 to a certain scholarship and 10 or less. Ha! But, I'll just go along with his revisionist rules.

And as to his theory proposed in this thread...pretty close to the most inane theory I have seen posted on GMG.Com EVER! Really reaching with that one...paranoia runs deep it seems.

And, I believe we have less than 5 games against D2 or lower schools. Are not some of those UNT90 are calling D2 or less actually D1schools for basketball? NT03....help us out with this. If there are 5 makes my bet look even smarter, but are not some still talking about our loss to a "lessor" division school last season? Man, you just can't please some folks. HeHe!

Edited September 16, 2013 by KRAM1

Mean Green Scrappy · September 16, 2013

Thanks for the update guys, I'll be watching closely from my perch at the Super Pit right behind Tasty to see how this unfolds. Maybe the money should be given to Tasty before the season begins so that he can properly over see this bet. He is a trust worthy fellow.

Mean Green Matt · September 16, 2013

Thanks for the update guys, I'll be watching closely from my perch at the Super Pit right behind Tasty to see how this unfolds. Maybe the money should be given to Tasty before the season begins so that he can properly over see this bet. He is a trust worthy fellow.

TastyGreek - The sports wager escrow agent of GMG.com.

TheTastyGreek · September 16, 2013

I'm happy to do it... But I have an alternate bet to suggest, inspired by Emmitt and 97and03's wager on the 2010 Texas/Alabama BCS Championship Game.

Call it, "The Put Up and/or Shut Up" Bet.

Emmitt and 97and03 bet a year of GMG exile on the outcome of that game. 97and03 lost, and he didn't post once for an entire year. That was enforced only by 97and03's own sense of honor.

So, I propose (assuming both guys agree to it) that the wager be over/under 10.5 wins against full Division 1 opponents (transitional Incarnate Word wouldn't count).

If we win 10 or fewer out of our 28 games (27 regular season, at least 1 guaranteed CUSA tournament game) against full D-1 opponents, UNT90 wins. If we win 11 or more, KRAM1 wins.

And whoever loses doesn't get to post on the basketball forum from the date that the bet becomes officially decided (could be as early as New Year's Eve, if you're an optimist!) through the end of the NCAA tournament in 2015.

If you're right, you win. If you're wrong, you have to shut the hell up (on the basketball forum, at least) for the summer plus one full basketball season. The rest of the site is fair game, but posting-restricted access to this subforum for a year.

Frankly, I still think our schedule makes it a sucker bet. We have 4 Southland teams (not counting Incarnate Word) on the schedule, along with a 25 loss UC-Riverside, a 21 loss Portland team, and two other teams that only won 12 games last year (Idaho and Columbia). And, even the second-worst team in CUSA won 5 conference games last year, and that was before Memphis and Houston got replaced with the likes of UTSA and FAU. If we were able to somehow lock Benford in his office all season, we still ought to be able to win 12 or 13 full D1 games with a player-coach or possibly by letting the Mean Green Club fan-of-the-game run substitution and strategy.

Anyway... A suggestion. Thoughts, everyone?

oldguystudent · September 16, 2013

a 25 loss UC-Riverside

Thoughts, everyone?

I appreciate your efforts in using the correct names of schools from the Big West.

NT03 · September 16, 2013

I'm happy to do it... But I have an alternate bet to suggest, inspired by Emmitt and 97and03's wager on the 2010 Texas/Alabama BCS Championship Game.

Call it, "The Put Up and/or Shut Up" Bet.

Emmitt and 97and03 bet a year of GMG exile on the outcome of that game. 97and03 lost, and he didn't post once for an entire year. That was enforced only by 97and03's own sense of honor.

So, I propose (assuming both guys agree to it) that the wager be over/under 10.5 wins against full Division 1 opponents (transitional Incarnate Word wouldn't count).

If we win 10 or fewer out of our 28 games (27 regular season, at least 1 guaranteed CUSA tournament game) against full D-1 opponents, UNT90 wins. If we win 11 or more, KRAM1 wins.

And whoever loses doesn't get to post on the basketball forum from the date that the bet becomes officially decided (could be as early as New Year's Eve, if you're an optimist!) through the end of the NCAA tournament in 2015.

If you're right, you win. If you're wrong, you have to shut the hell up (on the basketball forum, at least) for the summer plus one full basketball season. The rest of the site is fair game, but posting-restricted access to this subforum for a year.

Frankly, I still think our schedule makes it a sucker bet. We have 4 Southland teams (not counting Incarnate Word) on the schedule, along with a 25 loss UC-Riverside, a 21 loss Portland team, and two other teams that only won 12 games last year (Idaho and Columbia). And, even the second-worst team in CUSA won 5 conference games last year, and that was before Memphis and Houston got replaced with the likes of UTSA and FAU. If we were able to somehow lock Benford in his office all season, we still ought to be able to win 12 or 13 full D1 games with a player-coach or possibly by letting the Mean Green Club fan-of-the-game run substitution and strategy.

Anyway... A suggestion. Thoughts, everyone?

I like it , especially the non DI team factor.

Only thing I would change is maybe 6 months instead of a whole year. Just seems too harsh

UNT90 · September 16, 2013

I'm happy to do it... But I have an alternate bet to suggest, inspired by Emmitt and 97and03's wager on the 2010 Texas/Alabama BCS Championship Game.

Call it, "The Put Up and/or Shut Up" Bet.

Emmitt and 97and03 bet a year of GMG exile on the outcome of that game. 97and03 lost, and he didn't post once for an entire year. That was enforced only by 97and03's own sense of honor.

So, I propose (assuming both guys agree to it) that the wager be over/under 10.5 wins against full Division 1 opponents (transitional Incarnate Word wouldn't count).

If we win 10 or fewer out of our 28 games (27 regular season, at least 1 guaranteed CUSA tournament game) against full D-1 opponents, UNT90 wins. If we win 11 or more, KRAM1 wins.

And whoever loses doesn't get to post on the basketball forum from the date that the bet becomes officially decided (could be as early as New Year's Eve, if you're an optimist!) through the end of the NCAA tournament in 2015.

If you're right, you win. If you're wrong, you have to shut the hell up (on the basketball forum, at least) for the summer plus one full basketball season. The rest of the site is fair game, but posting-restricted access to this subforum for a year.

Frankly, I still think our schedule makes it a sucker bet. We have 4 Southland teams (not counting Incarnate Word) on the schedule, along with a 25 loss UC-Riverside, a 21 loss Portland team, and two other teams that only won 12 games last year (Idaho and Columbia). And, even the second-worst team in CUSA won 5 conference games last year, and that was before Memphis and Houston got replaced with the likes of UTSA and FAU. If we were able to somehow lock Benford in his office all season, we still ought to be able to win 12 or 13 full D1 games with a player-coach or possibly by letting the Mean Green Club fan-of-the-game run substitution and strategy.

Anyway... A suggestion. Thoughts, everyone?

If we had any kind of schedule, I would consider it. We don't. Right now, I'd put my odds of winning this bet at about 25 to 30 percent, as I think Benford has managed to schedule a few teams even he couldn't F up and lose against.

But Benford is still Benford, so I still got a shot.

Plus, although $50 isn't that much, it will go to a scholarship fund that will help a student athlete, which is much more productive than self imposed silence (although some may not think so).

Also, no need for anyone to hold the money. Mark and I have a pretty high level of trust (at least from my point of view).

How about something a little more productive? If there are people on here who agree with KRAM or my point of view, just post how much you would be willing to contribute if you are wrong. No need to have anyone on the other side balance your bet, and hell, if you don't like the 10 or under mark, simply name your own number and pick over or under.

Far more productive than making someone shut the hell up.

Edited September 16, 2013 by UNT90

KRAM1 · September 16, 2013

I'm happy to do it... But I have an alternate bet to suggest, inspired by Emmitt and 97and03's wager on the 2010 Texas/Alabama BCS Championship Game.

Call it, "The Put Up and/or Shut Up" Bet.

Emmitt and 97and03 bet a year of GMG exile on the outcome of that game. 97and03 lost, and he didn't post once for an entire year. That was enforced only by 97and03's own sense of honor.

So, I propose (assuming both guys agree to it) that the wager be over/under 10.5 wins against full Division 1 opponents (transitional Incarnate Word wouldn't count).

If we win 10 or fewer out of our 28 games (27 regular season, at least 1 guaranteed CUSA tournament game) against full D-1 opponents, UNT90 wins. If we win 11 or more, KRAM1 wins.

And whoever loses doesn't get to post on the basketball forum from the date that the bet becomes officially decided (could be as early as New Year's Eve, if you're an optimist!) through the end of the NCAA tournament in 2015.

If you're right, you win. If you're wrong, you have to shut the hell up (on the basketball forum, at least) for the summer plus one full basketball season. The rest of the site is fair game, but posting-restricted access to this subforum for a year.

Frankly, I still think our schedule makes it a sucker bet. We have 4 Southland teams (not counting Incarnate Word) on the schedule, along with a 25 loss UC-Riverside, a 21 loss Portland team, and two other teams that only won 12 games last year (Idaho and Columbia). And, even the second-worst team in CUSA won 5 conference games last year, and that was before Memphis and Houston got replaced with the likes of UTSA and FAU. If we were able to somehow lock Benford in his office all season, we still ought to be able to win 12 or 13 full D1 games with a player-coach or possibly by letting the Mean Green Club fan-of-the-game run substitution and strategy.

Anyway... A suggestion. Thoughts, everyone?

Sure...I think you ought to mind your own business. You like that bet? Go make it with someone. UNT90 and I have ours, although, he does like to change the rules from time to time! Ha!

KRAM1 · September 16, 2013

If we had any kind of schedule, I would consider it. We don't. Right now, is put my odds of winning this bet at about 25 to 30 percent, as I think Benford has managed to schedule a few teams even he couldn't F up and lose against.
But Benford is still Benford, so I still got a shot.
Plus, although $50 isn't that much, it will go to a scholarship fund that will help a student athlete, which is much more productive than self imposed silence (although some may not think so.
Also, no need for anyone to hold the money. Mark and I have a pretty high level of trust (at least from my point of view).
How about something a little more productive? If there are people on here who agree with KRAM or my point of view, just post how much you would be willing to contribute if you are wrong. No need to have anyone on the other side balance your bet, and hell, if you don't like the 10 or under mark, simply name your own number and pick over or under.
Far more productive than marking someone shut the hell up.

See, UNT90 knows how to be productive. No way we need anyone to hold the money in escrow. Once UNT90 got the bet whittled down to his liking there was never a doubt about his integrity based on either outcome...nor mine!

Edited September 16, 2013 by KRAM1

UNT90 · September 16, 2013

See, UNT90 knows how to be productive. No way we need anyone to hold the money in escrow. Once UNT90 got the bet whittled down to his liking there was never a doubt about his integrity based on either outcome...nor mine!

Hey, at least I didn't get the coach to throw the schedule so I could win a bet. ;-)

I don't think the parameters have changed since final agreement. Everything before is negotiation.

Just don't try to claim exhibition wins as counting toward the bet. They are exhibitions, not games.

Mean Green Scrappy · September 17, 2013

Since Tasty can't bud out and mind his own business plus has to lay out his own bet idea I feel like I should at least make him look respectable by saying I would accept his bet. Although as he called it, I know he doesn't take sucker bets. It's no secret I give Benford a higher approval rating than others on here so I would have no problem taking an over 10 bet.