#8 Rank Baylor Playing At Lowly Buffalo?

[FirefightnRick]

As in,.....At Buffalo New York? Really?

Rick

[Ben Gooding]

Yes. Lol.

[H-towngreen]

Was just thinking the same thing

[DeepGreen]

Baylor recruiting New York these days? Not enough talent in Texas, right RV?

[FirefightnRick]

Other HOME games this weekend to note, hat tip to AGC & GreenFrys of the Mean And Green board...

Saturday----Syracuse at Central Michigan (ESPN News)

Navy at Texas State (ESPN News).....a nice Saturday night kickoff at 7 p.m.

Mississippi State at South Alabama (ESPN News)

Pittsburgh at Florida International 11:00 a.m. FS1

Wake Forest at Utah State 6:00 p.m. CBSSN

Nebraska at Fresno State 9:30 p.m. CBSSN

Air Force at Georgia State 1:00 p.m. espn3

But they don't have Nichols St Ha Ha!

Rick

Edited September 13, 2014 by FirefightnRick

[DeepGreen]

So Wake Forest traveled to ULM and Utah State.

[TheTastyGreek]

Preface this by saying I'm usually less than thrilled with our scheduling, and I'm not super excited about a 5 game home slate next year.

BUT: If you're counting service academies and AAC schools... In the past 10 years, we've had nine non-conference home games against opponents like that. Drop the service schools and the non-Power 5 opponents, and we've had three in the past 12 years.

Definitely could be better, but the fact that in any given week some recognizable school is on the road somewhere doesn't mean that their opponents of the week are consistently scheduling better than we have.

For instance, in 2011:

Central Michigan had one non-conference home game, against non-D1 South Carolina State.

Texas State was still in their D1 transition (technically, D1 independent). 5 home games, no D1 opponents at home.

South Alabama was also transitional D1 (also D1 independent). 5 home games, no D1 opponents at home.

FIU had Duke and UCF at home.

Utah State and Fresno State are MWC schools... Not exactly the same deal as someone trekking to Central Michigan, especially in the case of Fresno State. BUT, Utah State had Wyoming and Colorado State at home, and Fresno State had Ole Miss and North Dakota.

Georgia State was transitional, no D1 home games at all.

So, other than FIU and the Mountain West schools... Every other school you listed above would have been pointing at our schedule in 2011 with the same complaints. And even Fresno State had a non-D1 on their slate.

FIU has been scheduling great the past 5 years, but they have two non-D1 home games this year. And that whole operation is a freaking disaster... As much as there is to complain about with how we run our operation, I sure as hell wouldn't trade places with them.

[NT03]

Wait , so they're not playing the Bills ?

Edited September 13, 2014 by NT03

[FirefightnRick]

....and SMU hosts A&M at Ford next week, correct?

Rick

[TheTastyGreek]

....and SMU hosts A&M at Ford next week, correct?

Rick

I have no idea. I don't really do research in service of coveting my neighbor's schedule, at least not in football. Especially when the stuff that is DIRECTLY under our control, and not contingent upon a contract or agreement with another school, needs as much work as it does.

But I know Buffalo hosted Stony Brook in 2011, along with UCONN.

[meangreanmick]

....and SMU hosts A&M at Ford next week, correct?

Rick

Give it a rest

[Andrew]

I was waiting for NT90 to make this post.... I'm surprised he has not already commentated on it.

[GrandGreen]

Did not RV comment on this issue in his last interview on this board? If I remember correctly, he stated he could get the home and away games with P5's and was close to announcing a contract. He also mentioned that getting games in the future on any basis might be a lot more difficult as they increase their conference games and some conferences are already restricting games with non p5's.

[FirefightnRick]

I have no idea. I don't really do research in service of coveting my neighbor's schedule, at least not in football. Especially when the stuff that is DIRECTLY under our control, and not contingent upon a contract or agreement with another school, needs as much work as it does.

But I know Buffalo hosted Stony Brook in 2011, along with UCONN.

Well they do,...in a stadium 1500 seats larger than The Ap, which they will have hosted Ok St, Texas Tech and A&M in.

Since we paid Idaho $400K I'm guessing we'd have to sign over the deed to the Hurely administration building to get Tech or A&M here?

Rick

Edited September 13, 2014 by FirefightnRick

[FirefightnRick]

So, other than FIU and the Mountain West schools... Every other school you listed above would have been pointing at our schedule in 2011 with the same complaints. And even Fresno State had a non-D1 on their slate.

I may be wrong but I can't see a start up (USA) in their second year of existence pointing to anyone. And Central Michigan would have been more concerned about their own selves hosting Navy and Michigan State the following year, as was Texas State, who hosted Texas Tech in San Marcos.

Rick

Edited September 13, 2014 by FirefightnRick

[UNT90]

All lower level teams have down years in scheduling.

The problem is we have very few up years compared to riods other teams.

And I love Tasty, but comparing anything before Apogee was opened misses the point.

We were told that scheduling would improve once Apogee was opened. It hasn't. Aside from year one it has regressed. 2 five game home seasons in the first 4 years, with the only home OOC game in those 2 years being an FCS is just unacceptable.

But the AD has flat out told us that he would rather get paid to play big names on the road than bring a marque team to Apogee (where the chance for victory would be much greater), and many of the old guard are fine with things never changing, and RV's bosses could care less as long as athletics is self supportive and they don't have to worry about it.

So what we are left with is being what we always have been and nothing more.

Edited September 13, 2014 by UNT90

[NT03]

FIU leads Pitt 16-0... Wow

[untjim1995]

This subject is frustrating on so many fronts, in part, because there are so many things to blame:

Because of our mostly lackluster history, no public P5 school in Texas, Arkansas, or Oklahoma will play in Denton (apparently) because their fans think its way beneath them to do it. Their alumni seem to remember fondly games in Dallas with SMU, so they have hosted Arkansas, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, and Texas A&M mulitple times over the years. At this point, although it seems amazingly petty, and we have played three of those schools in the Super Pit in hoops, it appears that it must have some validity. In that case, there's not much you can do, if its got any merit. And with the P5s basically telling their teams to tighten up on the OOC games against non-P5s, it is just going to be even more diificult to see any of them playing here in Denton, at least in my opinion. The solution would seem fairly easy to me--just schedule another P5 opponent from outside of the region that will travel here. I realize San Antonio is a destination trip for a lot of people, but getting a team like Arizona to play here in Denton shouldn't be that hard. If they won't, call another Pac-12 team. Call BYU, who might as well be a P5 team, as well. But we don't look at it this way, sadly, because:

Because we are poor... We have to play a bodybag game (or two) every year to pay for the athletic department. The university's BOR won't increase the athletics fee to cover this costly department--because it costs and goes against its value proposition. So we let schools like UTSA, Texas State, Lamar, etc... fully charge their students the highest amount available by the state for this cost. I guess they won't ever make the very prestigious BEST VALUE poll like we have. So because we won't do this, RV has only known one way to pay for the entire department, so he has the ADs at OU, UT, Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, Iowa, and other P5 money cows on speed dial. And because we don't have great attendance, we only have enough resources to buy home games against FCS schools or FBS dregs in the SBC, so the AD just looks at it like the Monopoly Man with his pockets empty--he's gotta mortgage something...so its the football and mens basketball schedule.

Because our fanbase, scorned by being left out of the SWC Club, made it very well known that scheduling a long-term series with SMU would be treated as a crown jewel. Plus, it would give the fanbase an "alternate" home game every other year, so we can schedule another bodybag game for fundraising or we can buy a cheap home game against Texas Southern, Idaho, or Nicholls State. And when you can schedule a service academy to travel here every other year, as well, you know you will get a "big" crowd in Denton at least once a year (over 20k), as long as they alternate. So, we get SMU and Army as the big OOC game every year going forward. Whether we get another home game against a FCS or FBS dreg is unknown, but it does pay the bills and keep the AD out of the red--again, that is the first rule of the Best College Value Proposition.

[NM Green]

I would be careful in saying that Smastrek does not care about athletics. I was in Hawaii and Las Vegas when he was an integral part of those college campuses and there was always a push for athletics, especially their POWER sport (UH Football and UNLV Basketball) to get it right. I am talking get it right all the way through from AD, to coaches to in game entertainment presentation. Unfortunately Smastrek has been dealing with a financial disaster since he arrived so athletics is not on his front burner this quickly in his tenure with us. But I cannot imagine it won't be soon, which is why everyone in the athletic department should get busy with:

1. energy

2. innovation

3. creativity

4. passion

I agree with the above poster who said go get these middle of the pack big conference teams to Denton. I can't imagine you couldn't get those programs to come sell their products in the lucrative North Texas market every other year. I like the Indiana series. Go get Purdue, Washington State, Arizona, Arizona State, Rutgers, Maryland, Kentucky, Colorado, BYU, Utah, Minnesota. I was on a plane from MSP this past week and there were fans coming down starting on Thursday for their Saturday game with TCU.

But when you boil it down you have to do one thing or the other or better both:

1. Get your in game presentation up

2. Bring in fans with more recognized programs

I would like Smastrek to place goals on the AD leadership to raise season tickets sales by XX%. I would like to see attendance goals set for each year. One of my favorite sayings is, "Don't wait to be perfect to make a contribution." We have a mediocre name draw, figure it out with creative, energy and innovation. We get a good name draw, you almost sell out the stadium. So much of this stuff needs to happen in January of this year and over the next 6 months. Month 7 & 8 are crunch and go time. This really should be the AD's office last year without attendance accountability. UTSA, WKU, LaLa, Texas State are showing us how to do some creative things.

Beat Nicholls State

Go Mean Green!!!!!

[UNT90]

4 years in Apogee without attendance accountability.

Only at North Texas.

[MeanMag]

I am not real happy with the Nichols game this year, nor Texas Southern last year, but I think the goal has been winning at home against recognizable opponents, and I can't say I disagree with it. I really haven't been disappointed with our home schedules since Apogee opened.

UH, SMU, Idaho, Indiana, Ball State. Would I rather have Texas A&M or Texas at home? Not really. Partially because I don't want their obnoxious fans, or UNT student T-shirt fans taking over tailgating and the stadium. It would be embarrassing.

[UNT90]

I am not real happy with the Nichols game this year, nor Texas Southern last year, but I think the goal has been winning at home against recognizable opponents, and I can't say I disagree with it. I really haven't been disappointed with our home schedules since Apogee opened.

UH, SMU, Idaho, Indiana, Ball State. Would I rather have Texas A&M or Texas at home? Not really. Partially because I don't want their obnoxious fans, or UNT student T-shirt fans taking over tailgating and the stadium. It would be embarrassing.

Worse than never bringing a name opponent is the two 5 home game seasons in the 1st four years. RV made the excuse on the podcast that it's because Tulsa left the conference. That is nothing but an excuse. Another 5 home game season was coming regardless of Tulsa (And, really RV, you didn't anticipate them leaving? Really?) because of the lack of scheduling flexibility due to the overscheduling of money games.

You like winning? Then you should be upset about at Iowa and at Tennessee next year while we play Bacon St. at home again. You don't build a winning tradition by playing multiple money games in one year on the road, and always playing these kind of teams on the road. What you are doing is telling your alumni base that you are what you have always been. That you will never be anything else and there is no reason to come back for a game.

But, hey, it worked so well that we drew 22k to the worshiped SMU game, right?

[MeanGreenTexan]

I am not real happy with the Nichols game this year, nor Texas Southern last year, but I think the goal has been winning at home against recognizable opponents, and I can't say I disagree with it. I really haven't been disappointed with our home schedules since Apogee opened.

UH, SMU, Idaho, Indiana, Ball State. Would I rather have Texas A&M or Texas at home? Not really. Partially because I don't want their obnoxious fans, or UNT student T-shirt fans taking over tailgating and the stadium. It would be embarrassing.

Agree. If we want to bring in some "big name" teams, lets look at ACC or PAC12 or something.

[untjim1995]

I would be careful in saying that Smastrek does not care about athletics. I was in Hawaii and Las Vegas when he was an integral part of those college campuses and there was always a push for athletics, especially their POWER sport (UH Football and UNLV Basketball) to get it right. I am talking get it right all the way through from AD, to coaches to in game entertainment presentation. Unfortunately Smastrek has been dealing with a financial disaster since he arrived so athletics is not on his front burner this quickly in his tenure with us. But I cannot imagine it won't be soon, which is why everyone in the athletic department should get busy with:

1. energy

2. innovation

3. creativity

4. passion

I agree with the above poster who said go get these middle of the pack big conference teams to Denton. I can't imagine you couldn't get those programs to come sell their products in the lucrative North Texas market every other year. I like the Indiana series. Go get Purdue, Washington State, Arizona, Arizona State, Rutgers, Maryland, Kentucky, Colorado, BYU, Utah, Minnesota. I was on a plane from MSP this past week and there were fans coming down starting on Thursday for their Saturday game with TCU.

But when you boil it down you have to do one thing or the other or better both:

1. Get your in game presentation up

2. Bring in fans with more recognized programs

I would like Smastrek to place goals on the AD leadership to raise season tickets sales by XX%. I would like to see attendance goals set for each year. One of my favorite sayings is, "Don't wait to be perfect to make a contribution." We have a mediocre name draw, figure it out with creative, energy and innovation. We get a good name draw, you almost sell out the stadium. So much of this stuff needs to happen in January of this year and over the next 6 months. Month 7 & 8 are crunch and go time. This really should be the AD's office last year without attendance accountability. UTSA, WKU, LaLa, Texas State are showing us how to do some creative things.

Beat Nicholls State

Go Mean Green!!!!!

I agree completely with you about Smaestrek's views on athletics--I just don't know how much effect it will have on the chancellor or the BOR. If he can influence them to raise the fees, then you can begin to put more pressure on getting a return for your investment from the athletic director. But right now, as it stands, RV has the easiest AD job in America--its not even close. The BOR has made it very clear that all he has to do is run the AD with a surplus left over and don't make any waves about funding, which he doesn't. He does a great job of building a schedule in football and basketball to pay the bills. He does a great job of connecting with the fans that like UNT sports--tailgating alone has bought him favor forever with most of the season ticket base. But, in the end, the only way that a guy who hired Todd Dodge, Tony Benford, and Shanice Stephens could still be here and still get extensions is if the folks above him believe he is doing everything they are asking of him. Since he became AD in April of 2001, football has a record of 61-101, a winning percentage of .377. There were 4 winning seasons and 5 bowl teams in that time. Mens basketball has gone 218-182 in his tenure, for a winning % of .545, which includes 7 winning seasons and two postseason berths under the guy who was here until 2012. If football pays 75% of the bills and basketball pays the rest, the only way the AD over that entire tenure could keep getting extensions is if the BOR puts a higher premium on value than it does on winning. Its certainly my opinion that they do just that, but maybe Smaestrek will change this somehow over the coming years.

[UNT90]

I think the BOR told everyone how important value is in the recent marketing campaign.

I don't think the majority of them wanted the athletic fee in the first place, hence it hasn't been raised in the 3 years that the option has existed.

And no one puts pressure on them to raise it. Even some of the most ardent fans of this program that post on here don't want the fee raised.

We are perfectly ok with sucking at sports.

Edited September 16, 2014 by UNT90