mksioux

I think that is a remote possibility, but the WCHA and CCHA would have to reduce conference games to accommodate the parallel Big Ten league. As it stands, there's no way Minnesota and Wisconsin could play 28 WCHA games and a full Big Ten schedule. There aren't enough games. I can possibly see a scenario playing out where Minnesota and Wisconsin agree to stay in the WCHA if the conference schedule is reduced to playing each team only twice per year (22 conference games). Then there would probably be enough flexibility to allow them to play some sort of Big Ten schedule and still have enough room for a couple non-conference series. EDIT: This, of course, assumes that the other four Big Ten schools want to play in parallel leagues. My guess is that unless all of the Big Ten schools sign off on parallel leagues, the Big Ten would dictate a full fledged BTHC.

Due to political implications in Minnesota, annual non-conference series between Minnesota and UMD, St Cloud, and Mankato are more likely to continue than Minnesota-UND. The Gophers will likely still schedule UND, but perhaps not an a yearly basis.

There will be no cascade of conference realignment unless schools like UND, Denver, and Notre Dame make it happen. My fear is that UND is going to be loyal to the WCHA and little will change, except the minor adjustments you mention. I think that would be a big mistake for UND to stay in a conference with only one Division I institution as a conference opponent, but it could very well happen. My comments are what UND should do, not my prediction as to what will happen. But I think you are wrong about the Big Ten schools having difficulty with a non-conference schedule. Teams will be falling all over themselves to schedule them.

With the arrival of Penn State, I've heard differing reports about whether a full-fledge BTHC is mandatory or just optional. Regardless, I think a full-fledge BTHC is inevitable. In my opinion, Wisconsin wants no part of the WCHA anymore. The addition of two more DII institutions (UNO and Bemidji State) put Wisconsin over the top. My guess is that Ohio State and Penn State will also lobby hard for a full-time BTHC. And the Big Ten itself obviously wants a meaningful full fledge BTHC for its television network. So everything points to that happening. So I hope UND administrators are preparing for a plan for a future without Minnesota and Wisconsin in the WCHA. A few preliminary thoughts: 1) I would encourage UND fans to look beyond the current competitive balance on the ice when forming opinions about who UND should be in a conference with. UND should focus more on aligning with similar institutions, and bringing more visibility to the program, and not simply on which teams happen to be "good" or "bad" at the moment. Long term vision is needed here. 2) I think it would be a bad idea for UND to stay in the WCHA with the loss of UW and UM. I would not want to see UND remain in an essentially DII Minnesota league. I like idea of alligning with Denver (which necessarily means alligning with CC as well) and then hooking up with the other higher visibility DI schools in the central, most notably Notre Dame, and then forming a conference around that core. 3) There is no college hockey czar, so the chance of people getting together and collectively overhauling conference allignment for the betterment of college hockey in general is slim to none. Each school is going to look out for its own best interest, and I encourage UND adminstrators to do the same. 4) Finally, just because UND is near the top of the college hockey world right now does not automatically mean that will continue that way. UND needs to make the right moves to minimize the damage of a BTHC and to put UND in the best position to succeed going forward.

Since you didn't even address my argument on the merits, there's not much more to say. I think you mistake me for someone who doesn't want UND in the Summit. That is not me. A Summit/MVFC combo would be my preference for UND (if UND had a choice in the matter), even after everything that has gone down. But that does not mean I have to agree with what Douple did in publicly interjecting himself into this very sensitive issue. If you can't see that he did that, then there is simply no hope or reason to continue communicating with you about it.

Maybe Douple's action wasn't the direct cause of the nickname being retired, but to say it had no absolutely no effect whatsoever is just plain wrong. Douple's position caused, or gave excuse, for Kelley and Faison to openly campaign for the nickname to be dropped. Maybe they would have anyway, but we don't know. Douple certainly made it a lot easier for them to do it. With the President and Athletic Director having no interest in saving the nickname, and actively campaigning against it, that killed any momentum that was going on at Standing Rock and gave the Standing Rock council an easy excuse to not act. I'm not saying the outcome would have been different had Douple not stuck his nose in this, but the Summit's position was repeatedly cited as the biggest factor for immediately taking action to drop the nickname, yet you have no trouble discounting that entirely. He played a role, even that role was being the person to make it publicly easier for UND administration to turn hostile toward the nickname. Nevertheless, even if I accepted your premise that he had no effect whatsoever, my opinion about Douple doesn't change. He simply shouldn't have stuck his nose into someone else's business.

Douple stuck his nose into an extremely sensitive issue for no good reason. Whether or not his actions were directly responsible for the retiring of the nickname or just speeding up the inevitable, it is not difficult to see why so many people dislike what he did. He should have just kept his mouth shut.

One public flagship university for the entire state would have been a good idea 130 years ago when they were starting these institutions. Too late now.

Right, they are not selling single game tickets for the UND series, but as with everything, there has to be a secondary market. I'm interested in Saturday night tickets only.

I wouldn't call it curse. I'd call it reality. I don't think the decision not to move up has anything to do with the hockey program's lack of success at the Frozen Four, but it's a huge reason the other sports are having such difficulty. Nobody knows what would have happened had UND moved up earlier, but it's a fair opinion to say things would certainly be better.

The one thing you are not taking into account is the possibility that UND will be blindly loyal to the WCHA. I think that would be a mistake, but I think it's a distinct possibility. Personally, I agree with you that if Minnesota and Wisconsin leave the WCHA, it's every school for itself and UND needs to do whatever it has to do to be best positioned to stay competitive on a national level.

Minnesota is the only school that really doesn't want the BTHC. But apparently it's gotten enough traction now that Minnesota can't stop it.

Because, first off, you can never in a million years get 50 instituations to agree on anything. More importantly, playing Big Ten teams gievs smaller schools recognition, brings excitement, and brings in money. In reality, the smaller schools would be falling over themselves trying to schedule Big Ten teams. That's just a fact I think can hardly be disputed.

Looks to me like has a pretty dang good source.

Okay, but in previous posts, you conjecture that the WAC may go to 16. Just curious why you think they would add so many.

I'm curious why you think the WAC would want to go the "Big Sky on steroids" and expand all the way to 16 schools. It seems much more likely they will stop well short of reaching 16. I agree that if they go all the way to 16, UND might be in the mix. But if they go to a more conventional number, I don't think UND would be in consideration.

I don't think the question is whether the WAC would be a good idea for UND. The WAC would solve all of UND's problems and would exceed anyone's wildest expectations. The larger question is whether the WAC, even in its present situation, would be even remotely interested in UND. I've seen nothing indicating it would be. I think the money could be raised if WAC membership was a reality, I just don't think it is. More importantly, in the Herald, Faison didn't even hint that it was a remote possibility or that he's even exploring it. He seems content with monitoring the situation and maybe filling a spot in the Big Sky if it loses schools to the WAC. Maybe there's something going on behind the scenes, but I doubt it.

He initially pledged $35 million to be the lead investor for the new football stadium, but he backed out. The official reason is stated in this article. http://web.archive.org/web/20080211104334/...004/10/19/10766 Of course, there were a lot of rumours down here on talk radio at the time about what really happened. Who knows how much of it was true. I don't remember the details now. He ended up donating $6 million near the end of the fundraising campaign.

Sure...if Mr. Bergson is a junior high student and this was an extra credit project. But the analogy is terribly flawed as others have mentioned. But even given the inherent flaw in the analogy, if you could have a referendum of all the Jewish people in New Jersey and they wanted to retain that name for their basketball team, I'd see nothing wrong with it. But apparently Mr. Bergeson knows better than the people at Spirit Lake. Perhaps he thinks they are too stupid to realize that the name should offend them. He is entitled to his elitist opinion, as many before him have held. However, I have respect for the Sioux people that have chosen not to travel down the victim road and do not choose to find an offense where none is intended.

He wants the SBoHE to come out and say that the nickname is retired 100% and there is no chance of it coming back. That is what he wanted from the beginning, even though he wouldn't say it. Douple really ought to think about running for office. He'd fit right in. After all that has happened, how entertaining would it be to follow this story if the Summit does not invite UND into the conference this summer? It might be fun to sit back with some popcorn and watch that story unfold.

I think you're reading way too much into what happened. It's much more likely that SR is just waiting out the clock so the nickname is dropped by the SBoHE without SR having to take a formal position on it. Nothing more than political cover, which cowardly politicians do all the time. I don't see any way to take any positives out of what happened yesterday. The only question is whether the SBoHE will wait until the Supreme Court rules to drop the nickname or drops it now.

This resolution makes no sense. Wait for the SBoHE to take action before taking action itself? That doesn't even make sense. Everyone knows the SBoHE needs approval from both tribes or it has no choice on what action to take (dropping the name). Very disappointing. The tribal council either has no understanding of the settlement agreement, or this was a disguised vote against the Sioux nickname. I can't think of any other way to interpret this action. In any event, the nickname is as good as gone now.

Even though UND doesn't like the way this went down, I don't think it makes business sense to do a self-exile from all RFM stations.

If the tribes don't want anything, then fine. But I still maintain the best way to ensure that this issue doesn't keep coming up year after year after year after year after year is to make the tribes a real partner in this with a real vested interest. There are numerous ways to do that. Knickball mentioned scholarships. I think that's a good place to start. To be clear though, I do not think any long-term agreement needs to be in place to retain the nickname. I think a long-term agreement is a goal, but should not be a requirement to keeping the nickname. As long as UND is in compliance with the NCAA settlement agreement, that should be enough to retain the nickname in my opinion.

Of course the SBoHE will want a 30-year agreement. But there is no way they will drop the nickname if both tribes are on record approving the nickname and UND is in full compliance with the NCAA settlement agreement. Obviously the ideal way to proceed long-term would be an agreement where UND shares a percentage of licensing on the logo with both tirbes. But there is no deadline on such an agreement and the SBoHE is not going to drop the nickname if such an agreement cannot be worked out by November 30.