mksioux

THE GAME IS IN MICHIGAN!!!! Give me a break. To even suggest that people should make every attempt to go to the game before expecting it to be on TV is absurd. Expect to be catered to? You are looking at it backwards. If UND wants people to get invested in UND athletics (buy tickets, buy merchandise, and donate money) then UND should be expected to televise its big games. This is especially true now that UND is moving to DI. That is how you build a fan base. If WDAZ doesn't have the resources to get it done, UND should look elsewhere the next time television contracts are being negotiated.

I was thinking the same thing. I know Coach Lennon is highly revered around here (and rightly so), but he should take some heat for this. There was NO excuse to play Chappel after he was first injured.

Call me negative, but it's tough to get excited about the probability of going to GVSU with UND starting its 4th string tailback. It would have been an uphill battle with everyone healthy...

Sounds like this game has been an unmitigated disaster. I'm not looking forward to the GVSU game with Steven Battle as the starting tailback.

I agree. I think the University is really wasting an opportunity with this land. I'd love to see a University village that is distinctly different from the rest of the town. Make the buildings close to each other and walking accessible, with unique stores/bars/restaurants that speak to the University student and community. Think State Street in Madison (on a smaller scale obviously). By the way, this has little to nothing to do with the City. The University is making all the decisions with respect to the development of the Bronson property.

human. I don't advocate cutting any programs over this. But I understand human nature. When you try to help someone, you want your help to be appreciated. You don't want that person to turn around, spit in your face, and take something you cherish. It's human nature to want to revoke that help, or at least question the help, when you perceive something like that happening. I'm not saying the analogy works in this situation, but that is the perception for many and I understand where their sentiment is coming from and I do not believe it is racism. It's human nature, with a healthy dose of emotion and frustration (and some would argue ignorance about how the programs work). But mostly, I think it's an unpersuasive argument that makes "us" look bad. I wish people on "our side" would stop making it. Those programs simply will not get cut over this.

If it was so important to the NCAA then why didn't they bother putting it in the original policy?

I think it's questionable, at best, given the wording of the settlement agreement that not having a nickname is even an option. For the life of me, I can't figure out why UND agreed to adopt a new nickname as opposed to simply dropping its existing nickname. I don't recall the NCAA ever demanding a new nickname to get off their list, yet we apparently agreed to it. If through subsequent clarification, going with no nickname is acceptable to the NCAA, then here is my take: In my opinion, the best nicknames in college athletics are the ones that: 1) Develop over time 2) Are strongly connected to the State in which the University sits (essential for State Flagships like UND), and 3) Are unique - not shared with any other college or pro team The worst thing UND could do is immediately create some committee to come up with six flavor-of-the-month nicknames and have the student body vote for one of them. I do not think an acceptable nickname will come from that process. It's probably unrealistic to think UND would forever go without a nickname. However, I'd like to see UND go without a nickname for a few years, let the dust settle, let multiple informal nicknames get kicked around and "tried on" by the masses. If one of them sticks and informally rises to the top, then there should be talk about formally adopting it. I just hate the idea of a contrived nickname.

against.

I was not optimistic about reaching an agreement with the tribes, but I didn't realize the name change would come this quickly. It appears the NDUS is pretty much conceding defeat. [url="http://www.grandforksherald.com/articles/index.cfm?id=57268

Winnipeg is two and half hours away and it's in a foreign country. I'm not saying UND shouldn't try to gain a following in Winnipeg, but it would obviously be more difficult than USD trying to gain support in Sioux Falls or Sioux City.

Last night FSN televised a replay of the UMary - Northern State football game that recently took place in the Metrodome. It took me a minute to realize it wasn't a high school game. It seemed there were maybe a few hundred people in the stands. It was embarrassing. The message it portrays is "let's let the kids play in the big boys stadium". That's fine if you're in high school, and maybe even for the NSIC, but certainly not if you're a Division I university. I realize UND-USD would outdraw Mary-Northern, but I don't think it would draw well enough for it to have a "big game" feel. I don't want any part of a UND-USD game in the Metrodome. Let's save the games in the big DI-A stadiums for when they are real, not contrived.

The way it's being proposed (per Yote 53), the two matchups per year would only take place during the four-year transition period where the schools are not eligible for playoffs.

As far as population and market potential, one could easily argue that USD is in a better position than UND, despite the small population of Vermillion. It is within an hour drive of Sioux Falls and Sioux City, neither of which has a NCAA Division I university. How about UND? Yes, Fargo is nearby, but Fargo has NDSU. What other city is within an hour from Grand Forks that has any population at all?

I guess if scheduling is going that poorly, then we should do it. But I really think it should be a last resort kind of thing. It would be a short-term fix to scheduling woes. I can't imagine either school would want it to continue indefinitely.

There would probably be an "existing contract" exception, and most definitely a conference exception to protect Mankato and St. Cloud in hockey. The big question is whether there would be a namesake approval exception. It'll be real interesting to see what Bemidji State thinks about this proposed policy. BSU needs the hockey matchup more than UND does.

I would guess Cal Poly considering he's from San Luis Obispo (SLO) and Cal Poly's nickname is "Mustangs". I'm looking forward to the GWFC as well, but from the scheduling rumors, it sounds like a UND Cal-Poly matchup will have to wait until 2009.

From Yote 53 on the Coyote board: I don't doubt it's impossible to schedule FCS games once the playoffs start, so why not just play the annual USD-UND game the second week in November and call it a season? Playing a team twice in a season stinks of desperation. And so does playing in the metrodome for no reason. I know there are a lot of alumni in the Twin Cities, but playing in a 3/4 empty Metrodome de-values the schools IMHO. That is something NSIC schools do.

The Tribe that wants to build a casino in Grand Forks is the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa. As far as I know, there is no Sioux tribe that has expressed any interest in building a casino in Grand Forks.

That story from the Argus Leader came out before UND and USD were formally accepted into the Great West. Are we sure that pre-acceptance scheduling arrangement still holds? According to this post-acceptance article, they were (are?) still working on a complete schedule.

This sheds a little light It appears they are not goingt to wait for a new President to make the hire.

It will be boil down to money if the tribes want it to boil down to money. If they don't, it won't. If the tribes grant permission, I'd actually like to see a continuing monetary element to the agreement for stability purposes.

I'd be in. Here's the docket: http://www.uwbadgers.com/printable_schedule/fb_schd_6129.pdf

Yea, the AD who was dead-set against DI should come back and lead UND into DI. No thanks.

They could tie in a percentage of licensing dollars. It would make it very difficult for a new tribal leader to come in and cut off a significant revenue stream over something most of the constituents don't care about.