Posted on November 24, 2008 at 6:31 p.m.

On the picture - the one in the middle, the former Dallas City Hall/Police Headquarters. UNT already owns more than half of the Universities Center (left of the picture) and operates the 1900 Elm building foreground, left - where Law School students will have housing.

On Texas reps to consider UNT law school money

Posted on October 21, 2008 at 6:29 p.m.

Scott: I am paying for the stadium. I consider the benefits to outweigh the cost. Hence, it's free money to me. The fee should continue to increase until it matches our most similar university in-state. If people dislike it, then a) if they are students , they may leave to a school with lower athletics fees (the closest is North Central Texas College in Corinth); b) If alumni, they can donate more money to offset the hike, or stop giving whatever paltry amount they currently are; c) If the general public, they can live with it, as they have no part in this. Easy.

Quality athletics = reputation, yes. But if victory doesn't do it (as you noted), facilities don't do it (as you allege), and recruiting and staff don't do it (the logical result of poor facilities and a lack of victory), then tell schools like Vanderbilt (renovated stadium 2004), Louisville (built 1997, expansion done in 2011), Utah (built 1998), Wake Forest (expanded 2008), and Texas (expanded 2008) that they wasted their money. Let's talk about football programs which were fiscally responsible and didn't invest in facilities. Talk to the football coaches at Texas - Arlington or at Sun Bowl winning Pacific to see what happened to those programs, and to their schools. Don't know where Pacific is? I thought their academic reputation alone was sufficient?

What ifs am I weighing here? When the stadium is built, the better teams that have committed to come will lead to higher attendance. That's all certain. No ifs. Unless you think Kansas State will draw less people than Western Kentucky.

UNT has plenty of needs on campus, but athletic money doesn't subtract from academic money - under state law, they're entirely separate (tax dollars/state money cannot pay for athletics). If you're so gung-ho to spend money on UNT's problems, why not go up there and suggest a $100/hr "Campus Improvement" fee?

Matt: I'm all for being outnumbered at our own stadium. It can suck though, I remember our home game last year at SMU.

St. Mary's is the second oldest in Texas.

On UNT students voted to help pay for new stadium

Posted on October 21, 2008 at 1:53 p.m.

Little bit of anger in your post. Bit of a pity party?

We all agree that Athletics = reputation. So it's obvious that a better reputation helps students both while they are at UNT and afterward. Thus the fee directly helps students - more than just a few times a year (although anything that helps students is good, even if it's a few times a year.)

Free money - the stadium will be paid off relatively quickly. Any money earned after that is "free". Simple.

Fouts is probably too old to renovate without completely rebuilding it as a new stadium anyway - and the expansion of the 35E/35W interchange might make that point moot. Plus, that would eliminate the additional parking and the opera house - both of which will replace Fouts.

Navy got within 500 of a sellout at Fouts and Kansas sold out at Ford. Baylor may be a regional team, but they still sell out stadiums, and will only come back and help us fill ours if we have a new one. My point, exactly. Kansas State & Air Force may very well sell out Fouts - version 2.

I wasn't comparing teams, I was comparing the effect of building a new sports facility. In that, the Rangers situation is directly comparable. How would Frisco's attendance be if they had not built a new stadium?

Schools known for football- Agreed, playing lesser-known teams is part of the problem. As stated above, and by my CUSA example, we can solve that with a new stadium. We own Tennessee and Texas Tech, historically. Does that mean that those are not "schools known for football?"

On UNT students voted to help pay for new stadium

Posted on October 21, 2008 at 12:57 p.m.

To answer my own question, the Extensive Research Universities in the area are UNT, UTD, UTA and Baylor. (Carnegie Foundation) But if you asked anyone on the streets what they were, you would probably get SMU, TCU, Baylor and maybe UNT. Football trumps academics in reputation.

A new stadium is a commitment that other schools notice. UNT was on the shortlist to join the CUSA after the third bowl - but UTEP got picked solely on facilities. Plus, better facilities brings better competitors to Denton. Air Force backed out of a 2009 game because of Fouts, Baylor cancelled for the same reason, and Kansas State as agreed to a home & home if we have a new stadium. Look at SMU - they don't sell out because of their team, they sell out because of their visiting teams. That's free money for the university.

Scott & Howard: The stadium is an intregal part of the campus experience. While I was there, I never set foot in the administration building, (as is probably the case with most students), but I don't suggest that it shouldn't be maintained just because almost nobody uses it. However, most students often use the Rec Center which was passed by a similar election and has been a roaring success when its predecessor was rarely used. These investments in facilities paid off.

No, nobody will come to sports events because of a new facility. The Rangers' doubling in attendance in 1994 was not due to a new stadium, but due to the enthusiasm for a 54-64 team. Sheesh.

Maybe the reason we can't fill Fouts right now is because it's a crappy stadium? That would be a good reason why attendance didn't go up too much during the good years.

As you say, enrollment is still shooting upwards even though tuition has gone from 1,400 when I wnt there to 6,000 today. Another $150 should have no effect. However, be of good cheer! After paying for the stadium (should take about 4 years) the fee will be used for the new baseball stadium!

Jason: Poli-Sci, actually. Right now, I'm attending the second-oldest law school in the state with Supreme Court justices as staff and Senators as almuni. I'm sure you can name that school off the top of your head, knowing its reputation exclusive of it's football history.

Unlike a private university, public universities have the resources to be good at more than 1 thing at a time. UNT can be #1 in music nationally, #1 in Political Science in the state (both of which may be true currently) and #30 in football all at the same time. The money comes out of totally different pots. They are not mutually exclusive. Plus, the music department has a new Opera House out of the deal - that will improve it's reputation just as much as the new stadium will improve football's.

On UNT students voted to help pay for new stadium

Posted on October 20, 2008 at 11:34 p.m.

UNT finally matches some other schools with a fee which, at $10, is half of what Texas State charges and hundreds of dollars less a semester than UNT's closest match - Houston. Good news!

Of the four football-playing universities in the Denton - Waco area, only two are rated as extensive research universities. Are the other two getting noticed because of their chess teams? No. How about their football history? Yes. Sports = Reputation.

jleeper: Texas universities remain one of the best deals in the nation. Private universities with less facilities and programs charge up to $30,000 - and the state has to make up for that somewhere. Since Texans won't pay any more taxes, the money has to come from students. Want to pay less for state tuition? Tell your parents to pay higher taxes, or go to a non-system school (the nearest one is TWU in Denton) Finally, by your logic, Texas & SMU, with the highest athletic fees in the state, must also be the worst universities.

music friends: The music program is strong, but being the best music school in the state and in the top nationally hasn't done much for its identity. The stadium will in a state where football is king. Plus, an opera house will be built on part of the land regained by Fout's implosion. Win-win.

pavel: That's correct. Incoming students may choose where they go - it's an open market.

On UNT students voted to help pay for new stadium

Posted on July 18, 2008 at 10:28 a.m.

Good for everyone. I hope DTCA follows the DART example (spending the money to build a true mass transit system) versus the Houston METRO system (fancy trolly-cars which are magnets for traffic accidents).

On DART ridership throughout Dallas sets record for second straight month

Posted on July 18, 2008 at 10:23 a.m.

There's a lot of international press giving us props on this. Anyone know what DFW's share of non-fossil fuel electricity will be after this (wind plus nuclear expansion at Cherokee Peak)?

On $4.93 billion approval brings the power of wind to North Texas

Posted on July 13, 2008 at 11:40 p.m.

This article contains far too many facts, and facts, like libraries and science, have a well-known liberal bias!

Articles like this need less facts.

With apologies to Mr. Colbert.

On Texas leads the nation in spending on abstinence-only education

Posted on August 18, 2007 at 2:59 p.m.

You point out a great many problems (some extremely good points as well), but what is the solution?

1) "the only real benefit in reality is to Mexico, and not the US," Prove it.

2) "I think if you were to listen to a side of this issue from these workers instead of the businesses themselves you'd find an unwavering dissent about such outsourcing tactics by our manufacturing and industrial complexes. " Agreed, but the businessman are better placed to make these decisions than the average workers. Who benefits from cheap chinese products in Wal-Mart? Who spends their money at a dollar store? The American consumer has determined that overseas production and illegal immigration are good things, through their purchase of goods produced by both.

3) "With what's already been shown of their obvious claims of their intentions of re-taking/re-claiming the states of California, Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, Colorado and Texas as real estate that was "stolen" fro Mexico," Ironically enough, Texas was stolen from Mexico. How? Illegal immigration of Anglos into Texas in violation of Mexican law. Should we both leave this land originally stolen from Native Americans? After all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander...

4) "Illegal is illegal ... period!" Speeding, jaywalking, littering, and tax fraud are all illegal, but you seem not to care about enforcing those laws. The sole laws you deem necessary to enforce to their fullest are immigration laws. Why is that?

5)" golden rings we as native born and naturalized citizens were promised ?" Americans are unique in that they aren't promised anything. If native Americans are too fat, lazy and privliged to compete with people who can't even speak the language, much less stay here legally, what does this say about the "downtrodden middle class". Maybe immigrants are drawn here to work because our middle classes have gained a misplaced sense of entitlement to not work hard. If we can't compete with immigrants, maybe that says a lot more about us than it says about them.

6) "The American people rose up en masse just this past June to relate to the Senate their grave displeasure with the amnesty plans congress sat ready to foist upon us." Congress should have ignored them. The American people also believe that flying saucers are real, and more know who Beyonce Knowles is than Richard Cheney. The only group in the US who had a high level of knowledge (More than 50% high) according to the Pew Research Center were persons making more than 100,000 dollars a year. Congress should ignore the feelings of the illiterate whole in favor of businessmen and lawyers whom are informed enough to make a decision on this important topic.

Harsh, but true.

On Immigration as advantage

Posted on August 16, 2007 at 1:06 a.m.

An example of people putting petty hatreds in front of our common humanity and the golden rule. Well Said, terryorze!

On UPDATED: Oak Point's "English-only" resolution prompts (more) concerns, questions and disappointment