Interesting Twitter Poll from Duarte

It will be insightful to see how this ends up.

1 Like

I hope JD doesn’t do a hit piece. The tweet from Randy Harvey to Dr. Khator yesterday doesn’t fill me with confidence though

Oh, this is totally going down the route of lost revenue over a controversial hire with lots of quotes from disgruntled fans. However, this is what happens when you make a hire and your hometown newspaper is run by Whorns.


Regardless of the result, twitter polls and generally any poll that is not asking a random pool of people a question can get skewed pretty easily by one side campaigning for a certain result. It will be great fodder for a story, but not exactly scientific. For instance, a bunch of Baylor fans could come in and swing the vote one direction and another camp who hates UH in general could do the the same. Not faulting Duarte or anything like that, I just have seen it happen before.


100% agreed. JD is angling this for a story.

He also worded the question poorly. “Will recent hires of former Baylor staff members have any affect on your support for University of Houston football moving forward?” It could have an effect of getting a fan excited and buying more tickets and their answer to the question would be yes, but he could be interpreting it as, “They don’t like hire.”


Absolutely true. You get this kind of “sabotage” imo.

This issue will pass quickly when the season starts.

So when this runs does the ad for UT come at the top of the story or down the side?


I’m assuming this will show up in tomorrow’s Texas Sports Nation and JD’s article probably won’t be the only article on the topic. Fully expect one from Solomon or Harvey as well.

Only question is, whether it will be before or after the requisite UT article from their UT beat writer.

I suggest you contact him with that point of view.

1 Like

IOW he only wants to get input from and write about those affected negatively.

Fake News Duarte!

1 Like

This right here tells me this is going to be a hit piece. If it is as bad and one sided as I think it will be then his UH credentials should be pulled.


It’s news and obviouly a story to be researched. If virtually nobody responds then that we’ll be the story that many don’t care. If many do, then it’s a story that many do. It will be what it is.
Go Coogs.

1 Like

Randy Harvey is just another tool in the Longhorn mafia at the Comical.


When I responded to the poll about an hour ago, 70% of respondents said it would not affect their support. Maybe not quite the numbers some journalists were hoping for. For me, it’s way too early and requires too much predicting the future to answer this question. Based on the current substantiated facts, these hires do not affect my support, so that’s the way I responded to the poll (I assumed it was asking about how I feel right this very moment). However, if more comes out later, it might affect my support depending on the school’s reaction. Until then, I don’t like the idea of “guilty by association” or, even worse, “guilty because thy name is Briles.” The latter seems to be the prevailing argument on the side of guilt.


At present, 23% of respondents say that the hire has affected their support.

The problem, of course, is that the poll isn’t limited to UH fans (although I can’t imagine that JD has a swarm of non-UH followers).

But even accounting for some trolls, that isn’t an insignificant percentage.

So what exactly is JD doing wrong? Reporting on something that is already out in the public domain? It isn’t exactly a secret that the Briles/Clements hire has divided the fanbase.

Hell, there have been plenty of folks on this board, other boards, and Facebook who have said they aren’t planning on renewing. That isn’t a secret either.

It isn’t JD’s job to promote UH. He isn’t on UH’s payroll. His job is to report on UH, for good and bad…


I will add to you comment Lawdog, that overall, JD has been pretty fair in his coverage of UH, and he really does do a good job.

1 Like

Agree. My point is with this quote in his follow-up tweets:

“By providing email I’m asking for those season ticket holders not renewing to contact me.”

Wouldn’t impartial journalism state that email is requested from not only those season ticket holders not renewing but also those that may be excited and glad about the hire?