82SiouxGuy

More students live off campus than on campus. Considering the fact that they are now renting dorm space to students from Northland, there are probably fewer students living on campus right now than there have been in many years. An on campus stadium might have some advantages, but students access probably isn't a major advantage compared to the Alerus Center. And those temperatures under 32 degrees can happen in October, or possibly even the end of September in Grand Forks. Weather is a major reason that the Alerus Center is a much better option than an open air stadium on campus.

The company that operated it is going through some major staff changes. I don't know if that is the reason they don't have the shop this year, but it is probably at least part of the reason.

FCOA can be implemented at any time, these aren't permanent decisions being made right now. And you don't get bonus points for being the first to do so. But if schools aren't getting any advantage right now, why spend the money on something that doesn't help you right now. Big Sky schools are hardly ever going to win recruiting battles against Pac 10 schools. Big Sky schools won't normally win recruiting battles against Mountain West schools. What advantage would Montana or any of the other Big Sky schools get out of spending the money for FCOA right now? When or if the market changes and some of the Big Sky schools are going to compete directly with schools offering FCOA, then I'm sure that schools like Montana and Montana State will find the dollars needed to do so.

Technically, the first store opened in Sabin, MN in 1902 (about 10 miles from Fargo). Fargo has been their base for most of the time since. Their first all sports store was in Grand Forks.

Scheels started in Fargo as a hardware store, and then expanded into sporting goods. They have been around for a long time before they opened their first store in Grand Forks. Their headquarters are in Fargo. They are a huge supporter of NDSU.

Fargo and Sioux Falls got Panera within a few months of Grand Forks, so I don't think that comparison has any validity. I ate at the Sioux Falls Panera when it had only been open a few months. Fargo was opening within a few weeks and Grand Forks was under construction. They moved into the region all at one time.

Actually, you have provided no real information. You haven't given any facts. You have just provided innuendo and second hand stories. Pretty boring stories since you haven't provided any details of any kind that can be verified or checked. Just vague accusations. Projects get delayed all of the time in government and in business. Payments also get delayed for a variety of reasons. Until you provide some details that can be verified, you have given no information that any reasonable person would believe as the truth.

NDSU fans: proud to do the very least allowed by law for their female athletes.

I don't see it as a problem for Minnesota. Both Minnesota and Houston are pretty young teams and don't have a lot of players with playoff or pennant race experience. Houston is 3-7 in their last 10 games. They lost their lead against Texas and don't have much of a lead over Minnesota. They may have hit the wall for the season. Minnesota and Texas have both picked up 3 full games on Houston over the past 10, so they weren't difficult for Texas to catch. If Houston continues at that rate during the next 10 games they will probably be out of it. Houston still has 5 games left against Texas, so they probably have a more difficult schedule left than Minnesota.

Sorry, I don't see any quotes from Mr. Jaeger that are close to my post. You said almost exact quotes, and there isn't anything. The closest is that he agrees that having the names registered as trade names probably isn't going to affect UND much. Which is the same point that several other people made, also. You didn't strike a nerve, I was just trying to make sense out of your post.

You are going to have to provide a link. I haven't seen any quotes from Mr. Jaeger that are even close to what I was talking about. And my post was made about 36 hours ago, just a few hours after the Herald first put up the story about trade names. You seem to be a day late and a dollar short in your analysis.

The Herald messes up headlines a lot.

He doesn't own the trademarks, he owns the trade names. There are plenty of examples where very similar trade names are allowed in different industries. There are more than 20 different trade names in North Dakota using the word Nodak. There are a large number of ways that UND can use any of those names for college sports when he has them registered as trade names for real estate. At most this looks like another minor annoyance. Just so people know, neither Sioux nor Fighting Sioux were registered trade names. Both were registered as trademarks. Fighting Sioux Club was registered as a trade name. Champions Club, ND Champions Club and North Dakota Champions Club are all registered as trade names, and North Dakota Champions Club is also registered as a trademark.

Me too.

It looks like 10-12 current bowl games involve G5 versus G5 teams every year (a few slots depend on how the P5 conferences finish). Another 6-8 involve G5 vs. P5. TV likes bowl games and pay well for them, which is why they keep trying to add them. Since all other levels now have some kind of playoff system, it would be surprising if a potential new 2nd level didn't also, but it could very well involve bowl games much like the top level does now. No one knows for sure at this point since they haven't decided if they are gong to set up that level or what it's going to look like for sure, but if they set up a new level they will probably also set up their own system to determine a championship.

This has been covered multiple times. And it is yet another attempt to continue to use the Fighting Sioux nickname forever. Actually, it is pretty obvious that this is Mr. Louser's goal. First, according to the Settlement Agreement with the NCAA UND must maintain control of the trademark, unless it transfers control to one of the tribes. UND has several reasons to not transfer control to anyone. Allowing the continued promotion of UND Fighting Sioux merchandise would undercut a new nickname and encourage people to use Fighting Sioux instead of the new name. How does that help UND? It doesn't, especially if someone else is getting the profits. In this case UND would hurt sales of new nickname merchandise, which eliminates profits, and gives away profits on Fighting Sioux merchandise. Plus it would hurt the chances of people accepting the new nickname, a lose-lose proposition for UND. If money was the major factor in these decisions then UND would have just stayed the Fighting Sioux and accepted sanctions since they caused the least problems for the hockey team. Keeping a flow of new Fighting Sioux merchandise is the best way to ensure the failure of a new nickname. Other factors that weren't addressed in the letter include the fact that Standing Rock wouldn't even discuss the issue with UND in previous years, why would they start now. The tribes didn't want money from UND for using the name, because they said they would consider it "selling" their name and that was against their principles. The Settlement Agreement had a date to get approval. The NCAA has also indicated that they aren't going to accept new Native American names, so it is highly unlikely that they would allow UND to go back to Fighting Sioux under any conditions. As long as UND remains in the NCAA, nothing in this letter makes sense for UND. It is very obvious that Mr Louser was not paying attention when the NCAA told the North Dakota Legislature what they could do with their state law requiring UND to keep the Fighting Sioux name. Which is a real shame since he is part of the leadership for the Republican party in the Legisature. In his letter he says that lessons have been learned, obviously not by the Republican leadership. This is just an attempt at an end around to keep using the Fighting Sioux nickname.

A couple of quick Google searches tell me that the Cedar Rapids team has trademarked the term RoughRiders for "Entertainment in the nature of hockey games". According to the article in the GF Herald, the attorney says that they believe there could be some confusion between their team and UND because of the hockey team. UND using the nickname for all of the athletic teams would be totally different. There should be no problems with any team other than hockey since they are trademarked only for hockey, and college hockey as a part of the entire program is quite a bit different than his program. Any financial cost to buy out his concerns would probably be minor and might not even be necessary. There is also a trademark on Frisco RoughRiders that includes the logo for the minor league baseball team. That wouldn't be a problem for UND since Frisco is part of that trademark. On the other hand, the trademark that comes up for Rough Riders shows up as abandoned. It was for clothing, but was abandoned more than a decade ago. If that quick search is accurate, then UND could probably use Rough Riders without a problem unless they try to claim that RoughRiders is exactly the same as Rough Riders. Include a logo that's different and that would hurt their claim even more.

There was discussion of offering the tribes a portion of the royalty money for use of the name, but the tribes didn't want to even discuss it. The tribes felt it would be "selling" their name, and that would be against their principles. Standing Rock wouldn't even answer the telephone to talk about it. Money wasn't going to grease any skids at Standing Rock unless you found a way to bribe some people. As far as paying for logos, you will always have to pay someone for a logo. It may be an employee you pay to create it, someone you contract with to create it, or buying one that someone already has. Bennet Brien was paid to create the Fighting Sioux logo. There are a lot of ways to create logos, and UND could easily get something that is completely different than what Mr. Sdao has or the old North Stars logo. The only question is how their trademarks are written to see if they would interfere with how UND would want to use a name and logo. The lawyers seem pretty confident that they have reviewed those problems.

Schools have been giving FCOA for other scholarships for years. They need to figure it for the federal government, for Pell grants. The numbers that keep getting quoted are AN AVERAGE of all FCOA. As I stated twice, and as I proved with a couple of articles, each FCOA for each individual is figured separately. Or maybe you know more about it than the Athletic Director from Auburn, Jay Jacobs, who was quoted in one of the paragraphs I listed above and again here. How amazing for NDSU that even their fans know more about athletic department issues than the Athletic Directors for the Power 5 conferences.

According to many sources, the actual FCOA is not just 1 number, it depends on different factors. They use the same line items, but the actual numbers will be different for different students. The travel item is the most obvious. The school will decide what travel will be included in determining the FCOA. For example, they might decide to include travel to school at the beginning of the semester, travel home at the end of the semester, and maybe 1 trip home during the semester. Or maybe they will include money for a trip home in case of an emergency. That doesn't mean these are the things the student has to spend the money on, those are the things that they use to figure an amount. Student A lives in Grand Forks. A trip home is a 5 mile drive. Student B is from Eugene, OR. A trip home involves either driving or flying close to 2,000 miles. The students have different amounts allocated for FCOA. From there they determine if the scholarship will give them 100% or less of the figured amount. The amounts quoted for each school are the expected average cost for each individual when all individuals are added together. Here is one example, http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/acc-coaches-worry-cost-of-attendance-payments-could-make-playing/article_1c97fb70-f6a3-11e4-b9c8-b37e131ec4c4.html Here are a couple of paragraphs from an article talking about the SEC, http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25199127/sec-coaches-are-increasingly-skeptical-of-cost-of-attendance-figures

If you read about the announcement, Faison explained that the FCOA is different for every individual. The $3,400 thrown out for UND is just a rough estimate for what it would cost per person this year if they were doing it for all scholarships this year. It will change each year for each individual. They aren't giving a straight $3,400 to every scholarship athlete. An athlete from Grand Forks, for example, won't get as much as someone from Eugene, OR because a portion of the money is supposed to cover some travel expenses home. So it probably isn't a big surprise if the 2 schools have similar numbers as long as they are recruiting similar athletes (from the same areas, etc.).

It's amazing that UND could put that all together in only 6 days. Especially when we've been told that Faison and Kelley don't care about any athletics besides hockey. It's too bad that NDSU got such a huge head start with this, I'm sure that they will get a lot of recruits just because they made the announcement 6 days before UND.

If Dozier continues to play the way he has the Twins will have saved quite a bit of money on his arbitration years.

A lot of times now the teams end up saving a few dollars on the arbitration years by signing the long term deals. The players are less likely to give up free agency years any more. That is especially true if the player is a little older when they come up, like Dozier. Younger players like Sano may be willing to give up 1 or 2 of those years. 30 is kind of the magic number for the end of the contract. The player is going to want to be right around 30, and not much older than that, at the end of the contract. History shows that the biggest free agency contracts come around the age of 30, and often start decreasing if they sign at about 32 or older. Length of big free agent contract also decreases at about 32 or older.

Sano has only been up for a couple of months. He should have 3 years before he gets arbitration. Those are probably under $1 million per year. When he hits arbitration his numbers will go up. Estimates would be $7, $14 and $21 million per year for the next 3 years, so his salary wouldn't approach Mauer's until 2021. Or the Twins could try to balance out the contract and save a few dollars long term by giving him a guaranteed contract soon. They might even be able to buy out a year or 2 of free agency at a slightly lower rate by doing that.