UND Fan

I am sure the costs related to the administration of the FSC are assigned to the Athletic Department: salaries/benefits & travel for a couple of people, printing, mailing, pre-game functions, etc. For almost $1.5 million in revenue, $130,000 in expenses seems appropriate.

Sicakota - that was a very interesting post. Where did you find it? I am sure there have been meetings of this committee since last September. I'm curious what they may have talked about.

As I mentioned earlier, I certainly hope that they do not attempt to refurbish the old REA. The price tag to simply repair the roof and other structural problems totaled over a million $. I suppose some of those dollars would be saved by a complete rehab but the cost would be a few million. It would have to be expanded in at least one direction to make it the size necessary for various track event or to have a decent sized FB practice area. With much of the internal structure being concrete, a rehab would be difficult. It would be much better to knock it down and build the type of facility we need!

I do know that there are some serious discussions going on about this at UND but have no idea if or how soon something may happen.

Sicakota - I absolutely agree with your point. We have been blessed in recent years with the Alerus, REA and now the Betty - all at little or no cost to UND. All are first class facilities that add a great deal to the community, the university and to our athletic programs. There is way too much second-guessing and whining going on about various aspects of these buildings - types of seating, where the students sit, why there needs to be a $500,000 fund raising effort to finish the Betty off right, etc. We should all feel very fortunate and stay away from the whining. My question of a couple of days ago was not meant to create controversy - I was just asking the question as to how many people the Betty will seat for BB - hoping that it was 4,000 rather than 3,300. Despite these great "game" facilities, we need to figure out how we can fund an indoor practice facility for FB, BB and track. We are missing out on some very good track athletes who would like to get their education at UND but don't attend due to our poor indoor practice and meet facility. Some of these athletes also play other sports, primarily FB. Once we get such a facility (and the answer is not rehabbing the old REA), we will truly have outstanding facilities in all areas. Recruiting should be much easier, practice preparations much better - with the overall results being more wins, more spectators, more excitement. Just what we all want!!!

I would think that UMD will become a major rival quite quickly - already a rival in hockey, the two northernmost schools in the NCC, they are already quite good in FB and both M & W BB, we often go head-to-head with them in recruiting, etc.

Huskies - I am a UND alum and supporter living in Florida. I have been to the Ralph only a couple of times. I am curious about your comments regarding "more spacious seating". Please explain - are the seats not wide enough, not enough room between rows, etc.

It does appear the Dressler may have a real impact at UND. He racked up a lot of yards for an outmanned ND team against Montana last weekend. His speed ranks right up there with the best in the surrounding states (their top two times at their respective state meets noted): Dressler 100 10.66 (MN 10.49, 10.58), (WS 10.68, 11.07), (SD 10.74, 10.80), (MT 11.01, 11.03) Dressler 200 21.83 (MN 21:09, 21.11), (WS 21.44, 21.98), (SD 22.56, 22.60), (MT 22.15, 22.54) Dressler 400 48.48 (MN 48.61, 48.82), (WS 48.52, 48.80), (SD 49.30, 49.50), (MT 49.36, 49.54) He would have finished in the top five in both the 100 and 200 in MN. I fully realize that all these state track meets were not run under identical conditions so we are not comparing "apples to apples". In fact, I believe the Montana meet was run under some lousy conditions. I also acknowledge that some of these stats may not be 100% accurate but the fact remains, Dressler is pretty damn quick!

I do know that there was a great deal of discussion about the capacity issue before they announced the Betty would be built. It was first proposed that the number would be 3,200. Many, including myself, felt that number was too low. I know many fans and boosters, including Coach Glas, was pleased that the capacity was raised to 4,000. I will try to find out what the real story is.

Sicakota - thanks for the update and the info regarding the Betty. Per the Project description, it will seat 3,300. It was supposed to seat 4,000. Does anyone know if the 3,300 is correct and, if so, why the change?

Anyone has any great rationale as to why North Dakota gets hammered by Montana every year? Their population is somewhat larger so they would have a few more kids to pick from but you wouldn't think they should be that much more talented than ND kids.

Sicatoka - thanks for enlightening me! It appears there may be some other inconsistencies but that does explain the lack of points for teams participating in track.

I was very surprised that we stayed in 4th. SU was right behind us at the time of the last update and they scored heavily in track, plus getting some points in golf and softball. We got some points in BB, W. tennis and track but not all that many. In fact, in looking at the final standings, there are many things that don't make sense (if I am reading it correctly): -- SU finished 4th in W. track and received no points. -- UND finished 30th in W. track and received no points while NW MO St. also finished 30th and they received 43.5 points. -- Both of Adams St. track teams finished in the top 4 and received no points. -- Grand Valley finished 33rd in W. tennis and received no points while UND and St. Cloud also finished 33rd and both got 25 points. There are many other examples in numerous sports. I would guess that overall totals and standings are correct - it is just that the per-sport grid is all screwed up!

I would agree - I doubt there is anything to this rumor. It used to be that if you transferred "up", you didn't lose any eligibility. Has that changed?

I guess I would disagree. NDSU would welcome Digger with open arms for two reasons: 1) He is outstanding! 2) They could "run it in our noses" that this happened because we elected to stay DII and this helps proves that they made the right decision - and we didn't!!

I'm not sure if this has been discussed here or not but Moorhead forward Chris VandeVelde has commited to UND. He will be a senior this upcoming year. He admits that he has always been a Gopher fan! No more!! Scouting reports??

Fanto isn't listed on Maine's website as having commited their for this next season. However, I don't think he is going to UND.

Does anyone know which UND men and women BB players are planning to spend the summer in GF? Historically, the more who stay in town and work out together - the better the team.

Do we know if Dressler plans to run track next year?

That is great news about Trenbeath - amazing is the proper word for it! The comment about playing for the Sioux next spring. I assume that we are talking about baseball. Is there any hope that he could play football again? I didn't know if this meant that he felt he could be ready for spring football next year after sitting out this fall.

Another article in the Jacksonville, FL newspaper about the struggles of another school, Savannah State, that recently moved from DII to DI. Again, I don't know how to attach it but you can find it at www.jacksonville.com. Go to archives for May 23rd. I am sure someone will post it here soon. Bison fans - my purpose is NOT to imply that you are going to have all of these same problems. It is just interesting reading!

Does anyone have any info as to how Beasley progressed this year? I know he was only active for a couple of games early in the season. Does Miami or other NBA teams still feel he can play at that level?

Very interestng articles in today's Forum regardng SU's move to DI, their fund raising efforts, etc. www.in-forum.com

8-0 after 3!

Now 6-0 after two!