homer

You don't plan fishing trip where there isn't any fish. You don't plan a ski trip where there isn't any snow. And you don't plan a gay prom where there isn't............well you get the idea. Thanks for stopping by.

I agree with darell..... Not a fan of that game on the schedule.

I'm in this catergory. I'm thinking this is going to make more schools fold than it does help college hockey. This is also why UND and a few of the other schools have to be careful. If they form a conference and leave a few other schools out in the cold other schools are in trouble. I hope I'm wrong but I see this move by the Big Ten taking schools away from college hockey, not adding any new ones.

Obviously UND's or Drads thought on this isn't going to stop it from happening. I have no problem with not saying anything and if there is a plan, doing it behind closed doors. If we say we're with the WCHA and jump ship we look foolish, if we say we're looking to jump ship and than no one wants to join up we look foolish. Better to remain silent, FOCUS ON THE IMMEDIATE TASK AT HAND OF WINNING ANOTHER NC, than worry about something we have no control over. I'm sure no matter what stance Hak or the administration takes someone on this board will be up in arms anyways.

Thats when all was good with the NCAA, no one knows what is going to happen now. We could just as easily get back on the sanctions list and Minnesota and Wisconsin have an easy answer for not wanting to get beat by us, the NCAA sanctions list.

Maybe they wouldn't have paid cause they couldn't afford it. I find it funny that a tournament good enough for the Oregon Ducks, Boise St. and others would not be good enough for ndsu.

So thats like you and all the other bison fans who say we are so over UN, we don't care about them anymo, OH I suppose we better start 3 threads a day on our message board about them and chime in on thier site everyday.

Thank you for your interest in Fighting Sioux athletics. You obviously have some time now since your team is all done for the year. Our team still playing obviously bothers you enough to come on here and post. Thanks for visiting and you'll be able to follow the Fighting Sioux where ever you are on Nat'l TV.

Our sophmore class is still playing this year. Have fun sitting at home. Thanks for stopping by.

A little bit of bitterness there. Have fun sitting at home and thanks for the well wishes.

Stay classy buddy. Mac gave his opinion but trust me when I say he respects the opinion of others that don't agree with him. He doesn't need a screen name to give his opinion and he doesn't hold a grudge and take shots at those on the other side. Grow up. Mac gave his time for the nickname and raised points that any athletic alum of UND can't deny.

Unless the top team from your conference gets a couple of "quality" wins along the way it doesn't matter what your conference RPI is. Any other team but Oakland this year out of the Summit is a 14,15,16.

Maybe the state could have just asked Standing Rock to have a vote. These guys don't have anything better to do than try and hang on to something that is really not something that should be in Senate. This is like steroids and baseball, old men putting their power somewhere it doesn't belong.

There are 3 parties I believe are responsible for our schedule- 1) Bunning- a team can bring in a Drake type filler game every year without much problem. Its when you need to get 3-4 filler games. These need to be long term agreements. When Bunning was here we could have started scheduling some of the 2 for 1's early in the transition to get some home games later on, he didn't even try. Everyone knows how he ran the athletic dept. so its no suprise. He didn't make things very easy for- 2) Faison- He could have maybe got a little more agressive right away as well but didn't. I really don't blame him for not doing any form of 2 for 1's this year as next year is going to be more challenging and we don't even know what our conference schedule for next year will look like. We do know that our non-conference schedule for next year is going to look pretty good so he did his job there. Its just not easy filling 6 games a year when you are having a dip in- 3) Fan support- We knew the transition was going to be tough. We have had some games in the past few years where support has been aweful. Students all the way up, that should change but you can't put all the blame on our staff. WE actually have balanced books here and don't spend money we don't have. Our AD's can't spend $100,000-$200,000 for 3 home games a year when the support just isn't there. Not being elgible for the playoffs really turned off the average fan as games where meaningless.

Well said Star. ++++++

With what I have witnessed from the NCAA if a non BCS school does not play by their rules they will go out of their way to make it hell for them. Yet they will bend their own rules for BCS schools and players. We are a pimple on the ass of the whole scheme of college athletics and not one of the big boys, the NCAA doesn't care if it pisses us off and as long as they are writing the checks there are a whole lot of schools who are going to go right along with their plan.

Good theory Star but in my mind if a deal was made than UND ends up in the Summit plain and simple. Those other conference either made it perfectly clear that they where not interested in expanding (MVFC) or did not have to deal with the nickname issue since the plan was already in place (BigSky). Once Gene Taylor first stated the Summit teams would not schedule UND due to the nickname and USD got accepted into the Summit than Douple insisted no visit would happen at UND until the nickname was resolved one way or the other he and the Summit where involved. I'm not giving a free pass but for as smart as you are making Kelly sound he had to have known if he didn't join the Summit this was all coming out.

Again, not saying it shouldn't have been printed but when there is no proof of what actually happened, what a person believes depends on who he believes. Kolpack printing the story could uncover a bunch of worms. Remember the night USD accepted the MVFC invite and Terry V. blogged about how if people knew the entire story of what actually went down that it would raise some eyebrows? I doubt he was just talking about a conversation between Kelly and Douple.

And its not a stretch to say there is some sour grapes by Douple and he's looking to save some face and to answer your question I, like most people consider facts something that can be proven. Its not uncommon for a person to stretch the truth to cover thier ass, ask your former president. Its clear there are no facts to back up what anyone is saying yet it makes a good story for the newspapers. I don't think this has anything to do with ndsu either but since there are no facts to go on with this story that can't be proven either. This whole story is based on who or what a person wants to believe.

Apparently in Fargo a story can be made with no facts and as long as it doesn't involve ndsu it is held as gospel.

I didn't know that Kelly or Faison could have forced Standing Rock to have a vote. Their lack of public support had nothing to do with them not voting. All "other" programs are a lot closer to being relevant now that the nickname issue is almost resolved one way or the other. Bottom line is when the agreement was made to drop the name UND had no conference and most of its sports teams where not elgible for post season elgibility for another 10 years. I don't care if you are John Wooden you are not recruiting any players to come play for you if you can't play in the post season. I wasn't throwing hockey under the bus I was stating the obvious that if "the financial engine of the athletic dept" was in the same situation of all other sports and was never going to be post season elgible dropping the nickname would have been done immediately. Stating that is not a reach at all. Oxbow, trust me I played with the name on front of my jersey and am sad to see it go but I also want our sports teams to get back to being competitive. It is more painful to me to see where our teams have fallen to than lose the nickname. Thats coming from a football alum. As long as the nickname issue was hanging over our head we where always going to be a looooooong way from being relevent. Like it or not the NCAA was going to make it a hurdle to high to overcome in sports where you are competing for recruits against more than 60 schools. Also, to answer the next question that comes up no one knows the Big Sky's stance on the nickname becasue they never had to deal with it. A decision was already made on the nickname before we got accepted.

Isnt' this the truth.

Professors at all universities have been sharing their views on all subjects that don't belong in the classrooms for years. This list also includes politics and maybe religious views which also have no place in classrooms. This is not going to change however no matter how much you wish it wasn't there. As far as Hakstol and Roebuck they are in completely different situations and you should understand that. The first calls a lot of former players made was to the coaches of their specific programs. In a way they where a lot more the voice of the alumni than the AD who's job it is to look at the effect on the entire athletic dept., not just one piece of it. Hakstol could care less how much changing the name affected the football team. Mussman could care less how much changing the name affected the golf team. Each coach has a job to do and that is win, if they don't win it really won't matter what the nickname is. They also have to answer questions when they have a gathering of alumni and are asking for money to support their programs. I'm guessing there would have been a lot of pissed off hockey alumni when they meet in Las Vegas if Hak didn't give his opinion. And by Roebuk giving his opinion it wasn't going to matter, he didn't have final say in joining a conference. If the AD says he loves the name but than votes to drop it so teams can get into a autobid conference he looks a lot more foolish than he would if he just avoids the question all together. Darrell I know you understand that a coach and an AD are in two different categories when it comes to this.

Personally I am sure he supports the name. The difficulty it has created for his day to day activities he probably isn't sad to see it go. Therefore he has no opinion. I don't think it is chicken !@#$ at all for him not to answer the question. His opinion will only cause an discussion either way. His opinion is not going to suddenly change anything. Its called being professional and not letting emotion get in the way.

I don't think a professional answer when you are under oath would be "Hell no". If the meeting this morning would have taken place at the Comfort Inn in north Bismarck than possibly answering this way would have been ok. When every news paper and news outlet in the state is there you do have to keep your answer professional. Bin said it best earlier when he said the Summit's stance was made perfectly clear by Gene Taylor way, way before this all came up. Douple only solidified that stance as he came out a number of times and said how the nickname issue was affecting membership and scheduling. Any pressure put on by UND would have also had to have been placed on the presidents and AD's of other schools in the conference as well. Why didn't Kolpack ask any of them?