UND GUY

We would? Or we wouldn't have heard about it. Did we hear about Conor Riley? Or Leevon Perry a bunch of times? Or...….and the list goes on. Athletes/coaches get in trouble with the law at UND and it's news. Players and coaches from the highest profile program at NDSU get in trouble with the law and it's conveniently not mentioned by their "beat writer (lap dog)" even though it's public record.

Well put. His teammates voted to not take him back. Listen to that podcast - on 1 hand he states how big of a party guy he is, but then he states how his teammates weren’t focused enough on winning. Huh? He claims that in high school he “never went to class”. He talks about doing just enough to stay eligible in college. That guy was supposed to be our leader last year? It’s really an amazing story from a guy who’s where he is only because people at UND jumped through hoops for him. Geno’s shown his true colors to the public what those who dealt with him knew from the beginning. He’s always cared only about 1 thing - Geno. As long as he gets his, Geno’s happy. He’s Mark Few’s problem now. IMO don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

We got our QB. Absolutely gigantic. Lots of buzz about his performance at camp on Saturday.

There’s a decade worth of student-athletes who had no interaction with their AD. None. He didnt know their names or accomplishments. Academic or athletic. That doesn’t go unnoticed by those kids. Faison was unapproachable and took no initiative toward his athletes, alums, and fans alike. He showed no fire and enthusiasm towards his university. Brian was a non-factor in fundraising. In fact he was a detriment. Did he help grow the fan base with his outgoing personality? Engaging fans at games, meeting the average joe knowing there’s a bigger picture? Fostering those relationships that grow into bigger and better things? He did none of that and to argue otherwise is pure ignorance. This fine university will be much much better off without him.

Taking the high road and not ripping Drick right now. The timing of this stinks but not nearly as big a loss as some think. He had by far and away his best game in the NCAA Tourney L. He's replaceable and beyond that, where the heck is he gonna go? It's an absolutely selfish move. Yet another strike against the "grad transfer" rule that's turned lower level DIs into a minor league of sorts.

Multiple message boards have us showing interest.

Terrible argument. In the 80s there were still 100s of women's basketball programs. It was a young game with great growth potential, given the size and success of their male counterparts (200ish male DI programs that had been around for some 50 years). Conversely there are 35 women's hockey teams. A whole 35 programs (and we're fully funded, have 1 of the best facilities in the world, and can't even crack the top 8!). On the side of their male counterparts, there are 60 men's programs. College hockey is an expensive sport with a very limited recruiting base. You don't see programs banging down the door to add college hockey programs. There's a reason for that. As we've seen, women's college hockey is VERY expensive. 35 teams. Not many institutions interested in adding it. There's a clear distinction between "young" and "no market". It isn't difficult to see.

Winner! Thought I remembered Faison/Schaefer talking $ last year when baseball was cut, and sure enough the 1st article on google was a Star Trib article that quotes Faison saying UND saves $720,000 by making the cut. Why wasn't the number announced today? That's a great question and a missed opportunity. If the public knew the actual hard number (FYI it's north of $2 million), they'd be 1) shocked and 2) applauding the move whole-heartedly. For UND to get ahead and capitalize on the 2 sports with the highest ceiling left for us, men's hoops and football, this move was a must. Some great people lost their jobs because of today's events. Thoughts and prayers to them. And the next time anyone sees Mike Mannaussau or Val Sussex, please thank them for all they do. They're the life-blood of the Athletic Dept, they don't get to make the decisions, but they have to fall on a lot of swords and deal with not-so ideal situations. Two fantastic people.

From reading in the past, it seems as if there were some here crying afoul about UND's Title IX situation. Over-compliant, or hyper-compliant were the terms. This absolutely proves that, doesn't it?There was some deception going on within the athletic dept from Title IX backers......or some people didn't understand the rules. Sure do hope the higher-ups who were pushing the hyper-compliance concept are going to be shown the door. They're partially to blame for the dog and pony show in the athletic department over the past year and some months. They've added to the confusion & created a fear of doing wrong by Title IX. Which was a lie.

FCOA not included there. Over $100k there. Nor is REA rental cost that was 100% attributed to men's hockey. $500k

Pandor's Box opened here. A large consequence of this that conveniently none of the proponents has brought up. When do the rowers get paid? They work really hard. Title IX, women's rights, it's unfair. When do the curlers get paid? They work really hard (not to mention draw a lot better)? Title IX, women's rights, it's unfair. When do the rifle competition people get paid? They work really hard. Title IX, women's rights, it's unfair. Etc, etc, etc. Money doesn't grow on trees. Huge problem with society today. Simple concept - supply and demand. Supply and demand isn't a Title IX issue. Instead it's a fact of life. When supply and demand is ignored things go in the wrong direction real quick.

UND hasn't talked to the Big Sky about this? Kind of alarming. But let's get this straight; UND has 7 programs that won't potentially cause problems with the Big Sky (if they're eliminated), UND has 3 programs that won't cause a $150k penalty from the Summit League (if they're eliminated), There are only 2 programs that appear on both of those lists. 1 of those 2 loses the university $2 million-plus annually, has no fan following, sells out 1/12 of their home arena, can't consistently make the NCAA Tournament despite playing in one of the best arenas in the world while only competing against 29 other teams (a lot of which are Division II), has only been around maybe 15 years and thus has a very very limited alumni base, and provides extremely limited to no exposure. This latest news has to absolutely solidify it doesn't it? How is this even a debate?

That was fun. Ran with them the whole game. Didn't back down and took every punch.....and responded. Great exposure and representation by The Flagship. Absolutely fantastic. You've awakened a fan base that will want to do that again.....and that's a very good thing. Can't thank the players, coaches, trainers, and strength staff enough. Just wow. Quinton Hooker, thank you. We owe that great young man so much. Thats the type of person I want representing me, working beside me, or leading me. Each and every day.

Don't see the PF & C spots as a huge need for next year. Avants, Shanks, Bernstine, Collins all return. That's 20 fouls right there. Yes it could be better, but it also could be a lot worse. If Walters continues to work hard that's another capable 4 man. 25 fouls to play with for 2 spots? You can easily win with that. Goes largely unnoticed but Collins has really taken a large step forward. Saturday his numbers weren't eyebrow raising but his defense & versatility were a huge key in that win. Knows his role, moves well, is athletic, can defend 1-4, and rebounds. Bodes well for the future. Kudos to him for being that glue-guy.

Lol once again a person in favor of women's hockey brings no substance to their pro women's hockey argument. They have really good FR? Going out on a limb. I bet when wrestling got cut in 97 or 98 they had a nice FR crop too. Bet a lot of people couldn't name them either. I'd guess same with baseball last year. How'd that argument work? People don't see how awesome their FR are because they don't care. 15+ years of data proves that. Close your eyes and click your heals together all you want. Facts are facts. Being a "journalist" (if you really want to state a compelling case and prove your "fan-dom", maybe wanna spell their HC's name correctly...) I'd hope you'd be able to form a better argument than that. This isn't candy land. It's a real life, dollars & cents issue.

NSD is always a great day. A little more interesting this year then in the past half dozen plus. 72 miles south it's been scramble-mode the last 2 wks. Slowly but surely, bit by bit, the pendulum is swinging our way. We're very lucky to have the coaching staff that we have. Looking forward to all the great coverage tomorrow. Go Sioux

New here. I see & hear this false argument a lot. There are what, 30 women's hockey teams right now. Women's hockey is in it's infancy like women's basketball in the '80's? But there were 200ish men's basketball teams in the mid-80's for comparison's sake. There are about 60 men's hockey teams right now. That's what we have to look forward to? The growth potential there is extremely limited. So no those two aren't similar in the least. The opportunity for exposure is not there. At all. Another argument is that youth girls hockey is so big around here. The numbers sure don't say that. There's 1 HS varsity team in GF between the 2 HSs. In the state are there 10 HS girls hockey teams? The math doesn't add up in almost all areas for women's hockey. It sure doesn't add up on the accounting ledger. Go Sioux