aff
-
Posts
378 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by aff
-
-
My question remains:
Why are fans of not just one but two DI-AAs so concerned about what a little ol' DII (with alleged budget problems, but with arguably the best facilities package already built) is doing?
Are things that slow in the great and wonderous DI-AA-land?
Or is there more to this?
Could it be that NDSU and SDSU know that(a) a conference is now nearly make or break to future schedules and budgets, and(b) the best option around might be the Big Sky and it takes UND to make that deal*?If UND was as bad off as I read here from some fans of the SUs wouldn't those be rejoicing in the realm of not having to deal with head-to-head competition from UND for glory and all other things that come with DI-AA?
Say what you will about my hypothesis, but there must be some reason behind all the attention from fans of the SUs. If not this theory of mine, then what?
* 12 teams.
A third team in the Dakota's going D-I is an interesting development, that would have effects on scheduling, and travel costs for both those schools. Also, UND is NDSU's main rival, and a renewal of the rivalry would be a big deal. You know that, don't turn it into something its not. I doubt that anyone on these message boards has any idea what if the big sky wants or doesn't want. For that matter, I doubt if the big sky knows what it wants.
Can you tell me that UND wasn't interested in NDSU or SDSU going D-I? From all of the articles I've read in the Grand Forks Herald (Editorials), I don't think that you should be talking about what other fans are wondering about. I would say the attraction goes both ways. Its really just an interesting story line in the soap opera of the NCC. To think anything else is simply arrogant. Nobody at those schools thinks they "need" UND. If all it took was another school for the big sky to come calling, I think you would see overtures to USD also. But you don't, because the current NCC schools have nothing to do with a D-I conference expansion.
Its going to be very interesting to read this board if SDSU and NDSU gain admission to the Mid Con with the indiana school in a month, and what happened to all these conspiracy theories. I'm going to come on here and demand to know what happened from everyone of you. The back tracking should be spectacular.
-
You're finally starting to understand. Numbers can be manipulated. UND being in the "red" could just mean any number of different things. Like being truthful while others are not. SDSU was not any better financially when they went D1 than UND will be. UND is (trying) not to lead with their heart and emotions like SDSU did, but (like Kuppy said we might have to) when 3 of your conference mates leave within a few years it makes it harder on you and in a way "forces" you to move.
Despite how much you guys seem to want to trash SDSU, I don't remember them having any tuition waivers instead of scholarships in D-II, do you? Like or not SDSU was better off then UND would be. Those tuition waivers are the reason that UND is running a deficit. In particular, Women's Hockey is hurting UND right now. I don't understand how, if you can't get the scholarships for womens' hockey, you think you can fund everything to a D-I level?
What do you guys have against SDSU? I've defended them and UNC, and yet you attack SDSU. I would have thought you would rip me for UNC, but for some reason SDSU is you're target? I don't understand.
-
Reasons UND didn't move at the same time as NDSU/SDSU
1. DI rules have changed since NDSU/SDSU moved up. UC-Davis' appealed the 13 year rule for getting into the Big Dance and the rule was changed to five years if in an autobid conference (but remains 13 years without a conference). That was a huge rule change and is often forgotten.
2. No conference was available and with the 13 year rule, there wouldn't have been a chance of getting in a conference for at least 10 years - NDSU/SDSU blindly took the plunge with this issue.
3. Their DI move occurred whan Grand Forks was still in a flood recovery mode - a major new tax for local resident for a dike assessment was upcoming. The local businesses were in no mood for supporting UND to move up. GF has a new confidence now that it understandably didn't have four years ago.
4. The REA was just coming on line and there was too much uncertainty in determining how much the REA would contribute to UND athletics. Would a sold-out REA continue for hockey or would average attendance would drop back down to 6000? In other words, there was too much uncertainty regarding ticket revenue.
5. UND was scheduled to host the 2005 DII men's basketball championships and held out hope that it would be a future host of the DII football and women't basketball championships. Local civic organizations saw DII as an way to attract visitors. The 2005 basketball tournament did not meet expectations (no local teams didn't help) and it has become all too clear that DII would not support a DII championship game at the Alerus.
6. The whole nickname issue makes the next few years an ideal time to move up.
IMO, those are pretty compelling arguments for why UND needed to act independently of NDSU/SDSU and in UND's best interest. Unfortunately, too many NDSU/SDSU fans seem to think that UND should act in the best interest of NDSU/SDSU.
Funny, most of your posts are SDSU related or SDSU defensive, 89rabbit has initials of "aff", and 89rabbit seems active on every board but this one. Sorry for the mistake, apparently jumped to a conclusion based on too few coincidences.LOL. I think I was defending UNC just as much SDSU wasn't I? Also aff aren't initials, its an old joke some of my friends had with me. That is an incredible coincidence if 89rabbits initials are A-F-F. I can't even imagine what name that could be.
As for your reasons:
1. Acceptable
2. Despite what everyone on this board thinks, there still is no conference available to UND. Maybe I'm wrong, but I won't believe until I see it.
3. I'm sorry, but the level I've seen in Grand Forks from buisnesses is exceptional. How much more do you really expect for them to contribute to UND? I think you're pretty much maxed out.
4. I seriously doubt hosting the womens basketball championship at the Alerus is a reason for going D-I, unless you're saying you want to host the D-I basketball championship. I fail to see how going D-I solves this problem.
5. How is that ideal? You could have to spend millions to renovate the REA. Doesn't seem so helpful to me, especially when your upgrading scholarships.
-
This amazes me too. I always hear and read that UND is running huge deficits and with all that red ink UND cannot afford Division I. Then I read the information from last year and it doesn't jive.
Revenue Expenses
UND $10,021,643 $ 9,958,728
NDSU $ 7,668,848 $ 7,668,848
SDSU $ 6,280,833 $ 6,547,381
UNC $ 4,865,324 $ 4,865,324
http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/index.asp
I don't pretend to know how each school prepares or reports from their athletic department, but I'm sure there are a number of ways of doing it. Looking at the numbers above it would appear that SDSU is the school that can't afford to be in Division I.
I am hopeful with new blood both in the AD and at REA that perhaps they can work together to maximize the facilities for more $$$.
yeah, no possibility of that being manipulated. I mean UNC should be congratulated for spending the EXACT amount of money that came in this year. NDSU too, thats a real feat.
-
Aff (a.k.a. 89rabbit):
Your SDSU Jacks have like 42 scholarships for DIAA football, when the limit is 63. Does that mean that since SDSU can't give out its full compliment of scholarships, that it is worthless as a D-I school? That seems to be your argument.
If 100 DI athletic directors were polled about which former NCC school or UND is most prepared to go DI, the resounding answer would be UND, not only because of nearly 1/4 of a billion $'s worth of facilities but because it annually averages nearly 400,000 paying fans a year since the Ralph and the Alerus were built. Those type of facts put UND head and shoulders above any other former NCC school. If UND has an achilles heal (at present), it is its lack of an athletic endowment. But guess what, SDSU doesn't have an endowment worth speaking of and neither does NDSU.
If UND is so incapable of making a move to DI, why are you and so many Bison fans so infatuated with a UND DI prospect? (a) concerned that athletes will go to UND rather than SDSU? (b) in denial that a DII school can obtain DI conference membership?
-
NDSU's lack of a conference is simply a matter of geography. You don't seriously believe that if UNC were in the Dakotas that it would be in a conference at this point?
I don't think anyone would confuse me for an NDSU apologist, but my point still stands on the differences between NDSU and SDSU/UNC. I think Gene Taylor has the right idea on how to do this and NDSU has the resources (at least so far) to carry out the plan. SDSU and UNC do not.
And if you honestly believe that UND now isn't in a better position than SDSU or UNC when they made the move, you are delusional.
I'm delusional huh? So explain to me why SDSU and UNC are both half way through their D-I transition, and UND isn't going D-I? The '"wisdom" of your president? You're waiting for a conference? You guys are delusional. You're school doesn't have the resources to be D-I, so you get fed these lines to keep you on the hook, until one day, everyone has forgotten about the old NCC, and you're still D-II.
I hate to be harsh, but right now you're a D-II school with a deficit, and you're talking about how much more prepared you are than two schools that have already went D-I. I guess it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. But I know, I'm delusional for not seeing how superior a school that is running a deficit in D-II is to two schools that have upped thier athletic budgets by a couple million dollars and continue to do so. I can't believe how dumb I am.
Simple logic defies your argument. If UND was better off then SDSU, they would have went D-I with NDSU. They didn't. There's no reason for that other than UND not being as prepared as those schools. Talk all you want about facilities, if you can't give athletes scholarships to play in them, their worthless to you as a D-I school.
-
It doesn't matter what SDSU and UNC did in D2 or how they compare to UND now... neither SDSU or UNC has (or will have) the financial ability to succeed in D-I, IMO. NDSU has the right idea on how to do all of this and they will have success, SDSU and UNC will not.
I also don't know why some of you are so hard on SDSU, they have already committed to a game with the gophers, meaning that when they complete their transition they will be fully funded in football. Its probably going to take them longer, but I'm sure with those paydays in football, things are going to be competitive over the next 10 years.
UNC also has already lined up a conference affiliation, something that NDSU, who "has the right idea" has yet to accomplish.
-
It doesn't matter what SDSU and UNC did in D2 or how they compare to UND now... neither SDSU or UNC has (or will have) the financial ability to succeed in D-I, IMO. NDSU has the right idea on how to do all of this and they will have success, SDSU and UNC will not.
And UND is worse off then both of those schools were when they initially changed divisions. I take it you don't want UND to go D-I then.
-
And it is still only $6.5 million for 20 (?) sports. Plus they are still under $1 million in total scholarship aid. Not a recipe for success.
SDSU and UNC both don't have two hockey programs taking most of their budget. If you took the hockey part out of UND's budget I'm betting they would be worse off then where SDSU and UNC are. SDSU and UNC weren't running a deficity in D-II.
-
NDSU will be raising student fees for this this fall.
For what purpose? Purely athletics, or a building project of some sort?
-
So what makes it so different with UNH students paying those fees? It's a public institution, it has about the same enrollment that UND does, why wouldn't our students be willing to give out some more money?
Yeah, thats an awesome attitude. Just bill it to the students. There's an endless supply of money. They can just take out some more loans. Maybe you should subtract money from the teachers salaries too. I mean what was UND created for? "Education"? Yeah, we all know thats bull. Clearly the students at the school exist only to attend Fighting Sioux athletic events, and pay athletic fees. I've got an idea USA hockey, what don't you send a letter out demanding that all alumni at your school increase their donations 850%. Or at the very least double or triple the amount. Oh, I know though, they already give a large amount of money from their careers. The students, who are already strapped to fund going to college, can afford to pay more right?
I'm pretty sure that a lot of students would have a huge problem with increasing their tuition, just so the alumni at UND can keep up in their ego war with NDSU. I don't know what you've done for a career USA hockey, but you need to remember that UND educates teachers, and several other disciplines that don't start out making $100,000 per year, or even $30,000. If you increase your tuition to $850, that will be another $2250 in loans, plus the interest you need to pay. For someone that starts out making $18,000 a year, that IS a lot of money. But go ahead, increase that tuition, and see how many students you lose to NDSU, or for that matter both SD schools, who have cheaper tuition. I hope you relize you'll be taking opportunities for a good life from many deserving students, so you can thump your chest.
Both NDSU and SDSU have committed to D-I without raising fees for their students. If UND is incapable of doing that too, then should they really be going D-I in the first place? This whole conversation seems ludicrous to me. UND is in the hole in D-II, and UND is having a D-I review committe to see if it can work. (Hint-Money isn't going to get any better).
-
Bisonmav:
Only hope that the NDSU (and SDSU) administration is as mature in its view as you are. It would be best for everyone in the state if both got in the BSC.
I doubt that SDSU and NDSU would view this as a maturity issue. Both those schools have invested heavily in D-I, and I'm guessing UND would end making up the difference in the form of a much larger entrance fee to the conference to pay other members for playing anon-qualifying for the full 5 years. SDSU and NDSU would probably have much smaller fees to pay. If that is the case, I doubt either school cares, since all had to make sacrifices to be D-I. If you think that UND is going to ride into that conference without incurring the finicial losses that SDSU and NDSU have in any form though, you'll be in for a big surprise. UND is not going to be playing in the Big Sky immediately while they ramp up scholarships, hurting other schools RPI's or rankings, and not pay for it in a big way.
-
Wasn't expecting a change in the ruling even in light of the supposed Tribal support. We are the NC$$'s show monkeys and are being made as examples of it's 'PC' power that it wields. If only we had major $$$ like the institutions that got exempted. We could then pay them 'hush' money.
It's time to bring this issue to court where I think the right decision will be made and the NCAA will hopefully be humiliated by it's idiotic rule against what they term 'hostile' and 'abusive' nicknames.
You guys keep saying that, but I don't really know what you classify the University of Illinios as. I have some friends that attended there, and I don't think its exactly a "poor" school.
-
NIT filed an anti-trust lawsuit against the NC$$. Rather, than going to court where they were sure to lose, the NC$$ bought out the NIT for 40.5 million dollars and paid them an additional 16 million idollars n settlement.
A poll taken in ND found that the majority of Native American do not find the Fighting Sioux name and logo to be hostile and abusive.
Yes, it is better to fight for what you believe is right than to bend over and take it because it will cost too much time and money and there is a possisblity of losing.
The NC$$ in the past several months has changed it's own rules, regulations and policies to fit whatever drivel they are spewing at the time.
aff, you're wrong. The majority of people here believe you are wrong. Nothing you can say or do will change that. So, bend over and take it... How do you like them apples?!! Very rude and wrong of me to state those things and demand you do something you don't want to do. Now you may know a bit how we feel about the NC$$ ruling.
What am I wrong about? All I've said is what is GOING to happen and why. I don't think I've ever said that I thought it was right. I can guaruntee you that there are at least 800 lawyers that work for the NCAA that think your wrong, and are right now preparing to tear your case apart in a court. I don't care how fanatical you are about the fighting sioux name, you need to at least understand what is working against you. If it turns out I'm wrong, and you will still be using the fighting sioux name, then I'll come on here and tell everybody how stupid I am. But I doubt the NCAA was stupid enough to try and force schools into something that can be beat in court as easily as people here seem to think.
FYI, I saw this quote from your president today:
``We're going to consult with the state attorney general on what our options are,'' Kupchella told Fargo's WDAY radio Friday morning. ``We might have to take some steps to consider some way to preserve the history and tradition and yet modify the name somehow.''
Doesn't really sound all that confident in a court case. Wonder why that could be. You guys should email him and tell him how easy it is to beat the NCAA in court, and that if doesn't agree that the NCAA would be laughed out of court "He's wrong".
-
I have a degree in CJ, and have spent over a third of my life working in some aspect of the system. I have also been a defendant in a lawsuit. Nothing is EVER guarenteed in court.
I said 95%, not guarunteed.
-
Are you an attorney or jsut play one on the internet? Just curious
I would prefer not to give out details of my life to a large anonymous room of people if that's alright with you. In either case, I don't think I've even made a legal argument. All of my arguments have been logic based. If you don't like what I have to say, thats fine, but I have yet to hear anybody explain to me why, if this court case is such a slam dunk, no other school in the country has even attempted to bring it to court. I mean, if theres even a decent chance of winning, say 25%, why hasn't anybody else thought about trying it in the courts? I'll tell you why:
1. You'll Lose
2. You'll waste possibly millions
3. You'll be getting national media attention construed as being a racist institution by liberal media outlets.
If anybody has an explanation I'd love to hear it.
-
A court outcome is NEVER predictable. Good try though.
Do you truly believe that. If I went today and sued you for stealing something from me, I would have a 50-50 chance of winning, even though we've never met? The outcome of that sounds pretty predictable doesn't it. These courts don't just cast black magic. There really is a system. If this was a barrel shoot, there would be an uproar in the country. Courts have to be consistent.
-
Just a quick question, you seem to know a lot about this, but do you personally support the Sioux nickname or no. Because you kinda of sound like we should not challenge this and that the NCAA is all knowing and all right. Go Sioux!
I honestly don't have an opinion on this either way. I think that if there really are that many people that are offended by the sioux name being used, then it should be changed, but I have a hard time believing that most Native Americans even care if UND uses the Sioux name. I haven't really followed this whole if we should change the name thing or not, since I really don't have a stake in it, but if I had to guess I would say that a lot of special interests groups have probably gotten involved, and everything about the argument, such as how many native americans actually oppose its use, the effects of using the Sioux name, etc. have all been so distorted by now that nobody even knows what their arguing about.
I don't think that the NCAA is all knowing by any means, but looking at the issue objectively, it would appear that they have staked out the legal high ground on it, and they will be almost impossible to beat in court. I'm not saying it doesn't suck, I'm saying thats the situation you are in, and theirs nothing you can do about it. If I sound like I don't think you should fight the NCAA, thats because I don't. It makes no sense from a risk vs. benefit standpoint. If you're in a war and your outnumbered at a bridge a thousand to one, your going to retreat and use your resources for something else, not sit their and get slaughtered. I know it sucks, and I sympathize, but those are the facts.
I guess you could compare me to a doctor diagnosing a terminally ill patient. Doesn't mean I wanted it to happen, but I can pretty much tell you whats going to happen. Some of you are going to hope for a miracle. Some of you will hope for a new cure, maybe it will happen. But probably not.
-
Wrong. In court I would give you a 0 - 5 % chance of winning. This isn't a flip of the die. People make careers figuring out what would happen in court. If you think that 5% chance is worth potentially over a million dollars, than by all means, sue. All I was saying was that no other school in the nation has thought that much money was worth the small chance of winning, and they have rolled over. I'm not saying it doesn't suck, I'm saying those are the facts.The alternative sucks because the NCAA is a monopoly, last time I checked, they're illegal. In court, we have a 50/50 chance of winning- with the NCAA, we have a 0% chance of winning.Marquette wasn't told that they would be restricted by the NCAA, to the detriment of of their ATHLETES (a violation of the NCAA's own rules BTW) they changed their name on their own time.Which is going to happen to UND.
Not because I said so, because it is the logical move. The potential of winning isn't worth the cost involved with trying to win.So we should just roll over and give up because you think we don't have a chance of winning?o, the 1980 Olympic Hockey team should have never even taken the ice against the Russians, I guess.This isn't a hockey game. It is predictable up to about 95%. Thats the way the court system was set up in this country. It is supposed to be consistent and fair. It is therefore predictable.
-
I respectfully disagree with you. If they are not a business why does the NCAA employee over 800 lawyers. I thought only big business does that. If they are a club. Do not most clubs give a vote to the members not just to a committee. The rank and file should be heard and, and why only a selct few schools come off the list. you can not apply this to some and not to other. Florida State is exempt, but why? I think this has more to do with money then a school being hostile and abusive. UND is neither.
The measure of a business isn't how many lawyers they hire, but where the money goes. In this case, the money goes back to the members. I know that the NCAA admin is becoming rich off of this, but the NCAA tournament money? Goes back to the organazation, even some goes to D-II and D-III to fund thier tournaments. It definitely doesn't have the appearance of an organazation, but keep in mind, that the members involved with it have budgets in many cases in excess of 50 million a year. Thats a lot of money (which also answers your question about why their are so many lawyers. Wherever theirs a lot of money, I promise there will be a lot of lawyers). The voting doesn't matter. I'm pretty confident that even if there where no committees involved in the NCAA, and only one person who pronounced king of the NCAA upon birth, it would have no effect on the NCAA's status as an organaztion. It is an organaztion because membership is voluntary.
The rules for why FSU is exempt and UND isn't are truly crazy. But don't have any doubt that there is an actually test that the NCAA has come up with. Absolutely nobody will understand it, or be able to cipher and sort of logic out of it, but it will be there, and it will somehow hold up in court, because there have been 800 lawyers working on it for 3 years.
-
I don't want to be negative for you guys here, but I truly don't understand the confidence you have in winning a court case. Like it or not, nobody is forcing you to be in the NCAA. Just because it is the best doesn't mean you have to be a member. NAIA Division I is all the alternative you need. Would it suck? Absolutely. But the amount of sucking won't factor into this decision. Only if there is an alternative. And there is. Heck, nobody has even said you have to be a member of any of these organazations. Technically your teams could be completely independent of any organazation. Yes, it would make scheduling games nearly impossible. But in court that won't matter, only if there is an alternative.
While I'm talking about it, is the NCAA even subject to an anti-trust case? It isn't a buisness, as much as it appears to be. It is a club, or association, which means they can enforce their own rules for members. If you don't like it, you can leave. In any event, I'm absolutely positive that the NCAA studied all possible legal outcomes in detail before this ruling was ever placed. There's a reason that Marquette etc. just changed their names, and didn't attempt to sue the NCAA. They know it would be a waste of time and money. If these schools thought there was even a chance of winning a liable suit against the NCAA, don't you think they would have taken it? Wouldn't the risk of losing time and money be worth the potential of winning millions from the NCAA? If nobody else has sued, I would venture to say that there is hardly any chance of UND winning a case, despite all of the big talk coming from the admin. Your president knows that nothing will ever come out of talk of a law suit, hes just trying to appease all of the alums that are up and arms. Watch and see what happens. I doubt UND can even win an injunction against this.
Speaking of injuctions, would that really be what you want? Having this name thing over UND's head for the next 10 years. Protests every time you go somewhere. All so that you can lose in the end, but have wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars? I know that Kupchella isn't that stupid. He's going to change the name, except feed everyone some stuff about "it still protects the spirit and history of the fighting sioux name".
I'm probably offending a lot of people by saying this, but things really couldn't have worked out better for your president on this. Right now he has alums breathing down his neck about going D-I and about the name. The NCAA is going to force him to change the name, which is going to cost the school big dollars for athletics. Since the school is going to lose money, he now has a convient scape goat for not going D-I (Which he doesn't want to do anyway, but he can't get the pressure off his back, and not have it be his fault). Look where he ended up...
Name change = NCAA's Fault
Staying D-II = NCAA's Fault
Administration = Martyrs. Alums will be happy that he "did everything he could".
-
Not that I'm counting
, but this makes seven recent DII move-ups with conference invite in hand: Central Arkansas
Kennesaw St
North Florida
Florida Gulf Coast
S Carolina- Upstate
UC-Davis
Presbyterian
Hmmmmm.... what do all of those schools besides UC Davis have in common that would make them different than the SU's and UND. Lets think hard about it. I know that there's a common link there somewhere. A reason that would make it an almost idiotic comparison between them and and schools up here. Wait, thats it! Those are all schools near several almost desparate D-I conferences in the south. But we're in the NORTH. So a comparison between NDSU, SDSU, UND and them means absolutely nothing! Thanks for helping me out on that one guys. I was a little confused. I mean, I've went all over in South and North Dakota, as well as minnesota and the upper midwest, but I had never run into North Florida or Central Arkansas before. But now I get why.
-
I read that and think there's an extra extra word, "not", in the quote. I say that because the quote is contradicted by the words that follow it in the story.
Take out "not" and it makes much more sense: "Creating a new conference is something that's going to be tough," Haskins said, noting that a few colleges in the area either recently have moved up or are considering it.
That's my take on it.
That sentence makes no sense at all. Why would he use the phrase "noting that a few colleges in the area either recently have moved up or are considering it" to support the idea that making a new conference would be tough. If he was saying that he would have said something to the effect of "noting that local colleges have moved up have said they are looking for a conference with an autobid, and likely wouldn't be interested in a conference with no NCAA basketball autobid.
-
You guys are funny.
I'm not an NDSU hater, and that's probably why you guys get that impression. I just speak the truth. I'm happy enough in my own little world where I'm not resorting to go out of my way to hate a program that is irrelevant to my team's.
Give me a break. No fan of a team would sit here and bring down their own team, and use their rival as an example of "how it should be". There's nothing wrong with being a fan of NDSU, but at least say you are. You're posts have the same validity whether you're a UND or NDSU fan. Posing as something you're not makes your posts lose all credibility.
UND's DI review committee
in NCAA News
Posted
I find it interesting that there is no mention of tuition waivers on that site.