homer

You might want to share that Sept 19th is just another game with the Bison media crew. I think they have some special things planned for that day that they aren't doing for UNI. I also have a feeling Sept 19th will be the weekend every NDSU sport has kids on campus for recruiting (just speculation). You don't do that for just another game. I don't deny the demand is there but to continue to downplay having UND visit while everything in NDSUs athletic dept says otherwise is getting old.

The staff has done a great job getting these kids on campus early for unofficial visits. Keep up the great work.

It is going to be hard for NDSU to tell the people of North Dakota they are no longer going to schedule the game after they get a taste again on Sept. 19th. Hell, even NDSU won't help the cause much with a planned 2 hour pregame show featuring interviews with past players and highlights from past games. Its easy for the entire NDSU graduating class of 2011 to type they are going to call all the shots but the people of North Dakota aren't going to want this series to end again and there is going to be more and more pressure on Faison and Larsen to keep it going.

Is next season a 12 game season? Also, if the opportunity (longshot) is there to get NDSU at the Alerus, UND should buy out whatever game they need to (Stoney Brook). They couldn't pass that opportunity up.

Did any of them have names?

The state of North Dakota created the law, the University of North Dakota made every attempt to transition away from the name. We already addressed how the NCAA handled the same situation with state law before and addressed it with state leaders in the face to face meeting. You must have read that quote. Now that the 3 year cooling off period is up, I would assume the NCAA wants to see movement towards full retirement of the nickname and transition to a new nickname.

The high school of Tucker and Irvin-Sills seems like a good place to build a relationship. Its a long way to North Dakota but those kids will be college football ready.

Your not going to find any concrete evidence. Our administration or committee members need to be the ones to provide it and I don't know if any of them know for certain. Again, this thread proves the grey area regarding interpretation of the signed agreement between the state of North Dakota and the NCAA. What there is evidence of from the NCAA is them getting their members to cooperate with them by hammering them in ways that can directly affect their success. They can range from putting very loosely defined violation terms on schools- "unethical conduct" or "lack of institutional control" to some of its members not scheduling teams or conference membership deals. Those can be proven and have happened all across the country. The only thing there is concrete evidence of is the NCAA is very inconsistent of the way it goes about its business.

I liked these two parts. It shows the importance of getting these kids on campus, evaluating them in person and giving them a "unofficial" opportunity to see the school and campus. UND has a lot to offer and getting kids to see all the construction of what this campus will be is huge early in the recruiting process.

What are they? I'd be open to listening to your ideas of dealing with the NCAA. My opinion on it is yes, there is the legal part and I won't try and argue that as this thread has proven there is a ton of grey area in the agreement. All I have asked is the UND leadership make this black and white for the people who will ultimately be voting on the nickname and at the end of the day don't have skin in the game. It really shouldn't be that difficult for them to lay out what was agreed upon. To me this is part of the "institutional control" that the NCAA loves to use and is very loosely defined. Than there is the NCAA's being able to take things out on UND. The NCAA and various committees make so many decisions that have an effect on UND, why give them any reason to make things difficult? These would include seeding, scheduling and to an extent conference affiliation if UND ever had a reason to switch. I don't think its fair to potentially punish the current or future athletes so some fans can hang on to a past nickname, regardless how popular it was.

I don't disagree. It is not a bad set up and I don't think NDSU will have a problem getting some of the schools on the schedule for duals. So does this get the full cost of attendance going for NDSU in wrestling? You are in the conference with schools that will offer it now.

You maybe missed this part. These six additions were made to give the Big XII tournament more legitimacy and regain recognition as an NCAA qualifying event. For the time being, these additions are for the Big XII tournament only. Iowa State will not be required to add these affiliate schools to their dual meet schedule. Don't get me wrong, still a big deal and nice to be affiliated with those schools.

No one knows for sure if they must transition to a new nickname but it in my opinion it needs to be addressed. What satisfies the written agreement that has been in place since 2012?

All most are asking is for clarification on if selecting no nickname satisfies the signed agreement between the state of North Dakota and the NCAA. You even say above that its not clearly defined and could mean anything. Therefore, it is not a scare tactic, its a legitimate question that should have been answered at the start but needs to be answered before things move along any further.

Thank you entire NDSU graduating class of 2011.

The O-line has a lot to prove this season. Last season we likely out weighed every opponent we played and struggled moving the ball on the ground.

It was partially sarcasm. In your opinion does being only North Dakota move UND further away from the Fighting Sioux name than Sundogs, etc?

Hate to see him go but I wish him the best. He was fun to watch.

They couldn't transition towards a new nickname because of the state mandated cool down period. Please explain how they can transition towards a new nickname when state law tells them they can't? And for consistency to your requests, site sources and examples. http://blogs.mprnews.org/oncampus/2011/11/solution-to-fighting-sioux-controversy-drags-on/

Maybe they were prohibited based on the meeting in August, 2011 between state leaders and the NCAA. According to people who were actually in the room, the NCAA acknowledged UND was doing everything it could to try and satisfy the agreements with the NCAA and the state legislature. They were attempting to move forward even though some who were outside UND were holding them back. If UND would have played as the Fighting Sioux in 2012, they would have gone against the agreement in place with the NCAA and what was discussed in a face to face a year earlier. Its similar to the situation of the cooldown period, UND can argue that they have been doing everything in their power to move towards a new nickname but the mandated cool down period is holding them back. The NCAA can't argue that but since the cool down period is up, the big question remains "will no nickname satisfy the agreement between the state of North Dakota and the NCAA?" http://www.ncaa.com/news/ncaa/2011-08-16/fighting-sioux-nickname-ends-2011

I really liked the way he played and the energy he brought to the field. Hopefully its not the case but its unlikely it would be in the tweet if it wasn't legit.

And replaced it with what?

The NCAA acknowledged that UND was trying to move away from the nickname when the state legislature was trying to force them to keep the nickname in the past. Could it be that they acknowledged that there was nothing UND could do once the state legislature put the 3 year cool down period into play and again acknowleded UND was doing what it could to move away from the name, which was use only North Dakota as state law was forcing them to do.

Or they keep up to tabs on how the NCAA governs.

Unless the name is the University of North Dakota North Dakota, its not the same.