mksioux

Not sure where the AG came up with that 13 day expectation. I don't expect anything to happen until the 20th day. Most likely it will be a notice of removal to federal court filed by the NCAA.

Pre-internet and pre-message boards I would have rooted for NDSU. Just can't now.

I'm just asking about the positioning of the satellite. Wasn't it 89 degrees west last year? I had a good signal for the series against Quinnipiac.

I'm getting terrible reception here. 51 and massive pixalating. It's at the same position as last year correct?

HAHAHA. Not meant to be punishment? That's simply laughable. You know, I've been very cautious about this lawsuit because I've been operating under the assumption that the NCAA has high-priced lawyers who researched the issues and they are still very confident in their case. But then I read comments like this from Bob Williams and I think maybe they really have no idea what they're doing. I guess we'll see.

Probably because they believe the Executive Committee has the authority to do it. Or maybe they know it's a grey-area and want to establish a precedent that expands the power of the Executive Committee. Or maybe they just didn't think it through and got caught with their pants down. I'm not really sure why they did it this way, but I'm fairly certain that the NCAA will not stop if the policy is struck down on procedural grounds.

It appears that UND's best argument is Count I - Breach of Contract - which is based on the fact that the NCAA did not follow it's own Constitution and Bylaws in adopting this policy. However, if UND wins on Breach of Contract alone, it may just be a temporary victory. All the NCAA would have to do is refine the policy (make it consistent and somewhat logical), and then go back to the members for a vote. Does anyone honestly think the vast majority of members (most of which are controlled by far-left ideologues) wouldn't vote for some sort of nickname ban that would undoubtedly cover UND? The way I see it, Count III - Unlawful Restraint on Trade - is the theory Sioux fans should be rooting for. That's the only one that will prevent the NCAA from simply going back and revising the policy and bringing it to the members. If UND can win on Count III, that would be a HUGE victory. However, IMO, Count III is -- by far -- the toughest argument for UND to successfully make.

I must say, I was surprised by the venue. I thought they would file in federal court. I assume the NCAA will remove the case to federal court. Anyone have a link to the complaint?

Maybe. But let's be careful. UND almost lost to Augustana.

I think the article is talking about the womens team.

Federal court is not like many state courts. If he gets death, it will not be decades before he is executed.

What's comical about this whole situation is that the Bison fans like the author of the editorial piece act like they care about UND's financial situation when it's readily apparent that their underlying motive is that they don't want to see UND join them in DI. That's fine. But don't couch it like you're a concerned citizen looking out for UND's finances. The stated "concern" rings hollow and that's why nobody takes it seriously. To be fair, I'm sure there were UND fans doing the same thing (acting like they cared about NDSU's finances) a few years ago when NDSU made the jump. Those UND fans doing it back then were frauds, just like the NDSU fans doing it now are frauds. An outsider reading these message boards would think he stumbled on to some nerd-infested, calculator-toting message board for forensic accounting enthusiasts. My apologies to the one or two of you out there that are true economic conservatives and have and continue to criticize both schools for making the move on a less-than-sound financial footing. I respect that argument, even though I still disagree with it. I believe there is a significant value to affiliating your university with its peers and there will never be a financially perfect time to make the move. Full disclosure - I've been on record from the begining that UND should have moved with NDSU. UND made a mistake by staying put. I will admit to any NDSU fan that UND will have a more difficult time in the transition because of its mistake. Having said that, to think that UND is now doomed is laughable. UND will be just fine in the long run.

For the sake of my sanity, let us never mention that game ever again. I think UNI will prove to be simply too fast. UNI by about 30.

He's already been found guilty of a federal crime. The next stage is to determine whether he is eligible for the death penalty. The third phase is the actual sentencing.

I don't think it had much chance to begin with, but I think the proposed legislation against the NCAA will fizzle-away now. This policy hit UND the hardest and UND is going to be the only one left fighting.

None of us will ever be free until long-hair persecution ends!

The only thing keeping the NCAA from acting too aggressively in their social engineering quest is because they don't want excessive media scrutiny. The NCAA got burned pretty bad by FSU, Florida politicians, and the media in general in the early stages of the Indian nickname fiasco. I think they've learned from that experience to take baby steps, pick on small and easy targets that will not raise too much media scrutiny. For example, as its stands, I'd be shocked if that proposed legislation limiting the scope of the NCAA were to become law. On the other hand, if the NCAA gets too aggressive with its social engineering, makes too many people mad, it most certainly will. In a way, I hope the NCAA will "bite off more than it can chew" because that may be the only way this madness will end.

The NCAA is considering banning all post-season play in South Carolina due to the fact that the state flies the confederate flag on the capitol grounds. Pre-determined (bidded) events, such as the NCAA basketball regionals, have already banned, but this new proposal would extend to merit-based post-season games as well. I think it's important to note, no matter how you feel about the issue, that the member institutions that are negatively impacted by this proposed policy don't have any control over of what flags are flown on the state capitol grounds. It's also important to note that it's an enormous stretch to argue that this issue is reasonably related to college athletics. The NCAA is basically establishing a precedent that it has the right to punish all member instiutions within an entire state for any real or perceived social injustice going on in that state, whether or not it has to do with college athletics. Once that precedent is established, why stop in South Carolina? Why not ban post-season play in the entire state of North Dakota because the Indian symbols on State Trooper vehicles and highway signs create a hostile and abusive environment in the entire state? Better yet, why not ban post-season play in any state that has passed a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage? I mean, after all, wouldn't a state that has banned gay marriage in its constitution be unwelcoming to gay athletes, thereby creating a hostile and abusive environment?

Anyone who is so immature that they refuse to capitalize GF is not worth listening to.

Nah...what fun would it be to argue about sports when you can pretend to be a forensic accountant and argue about which school is in better financial shape.

I'd be disappointed if Mr. Bunning came in and didn't ruffle a few feathers.

The decision on venue has not been announced. My guess is that it will be federal court, District of North Dakota.

It's a little disappointing that they're waiting an extra year, but at least it's happening. It needed to happen, and year late is better than not at all.

I suppose the Democrat candidate is in a bit of a sticky situation in that the vast majority of the people in the state support the nickname, but a sizeable number of activists in his own party are staunchly against it. He's trying to a walk a middle-road by saying he supports the nickname, but doesn't support the lawsuit by the A.G. It's kind of like ND's congressional delegation who say, when asked, that they support the name, but don't do anything to show it. Stenehjem seems to be only politician in North Dakota with a spine on this issue. I'll predict that the issue of the A.G. bringing the lawsuit ends up in court before the actual litigation with the NCAA. The activists will stop at nothing to put up as many roadblocks as possible.

I think there's a big difference between someone starting a non-flaming thread about whether Engelstad threw the parties (not suppressing) and splitting a discussion resulting from a flame-throwing post (encouraging). The "Nazi Palace" comment by Piper was clearly a reference to Engelstad and his parties. Rewarding the comment with its own thread is like saying "your post was unacceptable, but you do raise a good point worthy of discussion." I guess we'll agree to disagree on the relevance of this topic. It happened over 20 years ago and has been discussed ad nauseum ever since Ralph made the donation. The level of interest amongst Sioux fans is probably very low. It generates a lot of activity because Gopher fans (and now Bison fans) love to talk about it becuase they know it gets under the Sioux fans' skin, and then Sioux fans feel obligated to respond. That doesn't make it a worthy discussion, it makes it a tired and frustrating discussion. But I know...I can just ignore the thread. I guess I've just been around too long.