dlsiouxfan
-
Posts
959 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Posts posted by dlsiouxfan
-
-
On a related note, have any of these suddenly inspired legislators contacted the NCAA to determine what their next move would be if this bill passes and what repercussions that would mean for UND? That would seem to be some important information to have before the legislature takes a vote on it. I'm guessing that they haven't, which speaks volumes about how much they actually give a !@#$ about the university and it's athletic teams.
-
I don't. I think the entire deal was to thwart the will of the people both on the reservation and in the GF/UND community.
What we do know is that Stenejhem said he and the governor would meet with the tribes and negotiate a deal with the tribes.
Wayne never did any such thing.
Wayne can't force John Hoeven to meet with the tribes. Hoeven never had any intention of helping UND during this process and yet he is immune to criticism. Stenehjem probably got the best deal he could out of the settlement. At the time there was no guarantee that Spirit Lake would ever hold a referendum either. I'm sure Stenehjem had to give something up to get the extended deadline to remove the logos from the Ralph and the two tribe concession was probably it.
-
I have a few questions for the nickname supporters on here demanding Kelly and Faison. After you run Faison and Kelly out of town to get your pound of flesh for the nickname, who do you think will even want to be president or AD of this university? Should we just have Al Carlson and Jeff Kolpack pick our next AD and Prez? You obviously believe they have UND's best interests heart if you believe this drivel.
Everyone needs to think rationally about this. Douple knows his ass is grass and he wants to take down UND with him. The man's been Gene Taylor's cuddling partner for the last few years and now he's doing his buddy a solid on his way out the door.
-
I'm still not understanding your logic on why ND needs to bail out states that overspend their own budgets....Why not ask what we could have done with the 65 billion we gave to GM and Chrysler to save the IAW Union...Its going to be neat to see how the Dems play this one when ASFME comes calling asking to be rewarded for all of their campaign dollars in the last 30 years. Again, thinking the states somehow got into this ordeal because of the actions of Republicans in the Federal government makes no sense either nor does it make sense to think the Democrats in ND were the only hope of fixing this as they did nothing whilst in the majority other than vote for a unknown piece of legislation against the will of the people. Additionally, I would state that you only need to look at the legislatures of these states that are suffering the worst to quickly find out that they have been Democrat majority ruled for the longest time and now will have to pay the price of overspending. The country doesn't have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem...plain and simple.
Lastly, how has the 800 billion stimulus bill gone for all of these states? If we would have focused on infrastructure builds like replacing bridges, highways, and the shoddy electrical grid then we wouldn't be dealing with a minimal bump in growth and a 9.4% unemployement rate for 2011 and a potential double dip recession once the Fed quits buying T-bills in July. Instead, the President and his majority in both houses rewarded cities and states by allowing them to continue to pay their city/state employees for one more year and even letting them add employees that the Federal government will not pay for in the next fiscal cycle. Imagine what you could have done with that money now when we have multiple states having to figure out how to get around the Constitution and try to file Bankruptcy. If you think things have been tough lately, you haven't seen anything yet and most of the politicians, republican and democrat, are trying to get out now so they won't be painted with the loser brush when the crap really hits the fan...My 2 cents...
North Dakotans can pat themselves on the back and congratulate themselves over the surplus, while at the same times rejoicing in the misfortune of other states if they see fit, but they should at least acknowledge the reality that prior to the oil boom the state was in as dire financial straights as most other states are finding themselves now. It should also be pointed out that absent the federal dollars that fill the holes in ND's budget, the state would be looking at a $1 billion dollar deficit instead of the present surplus, but I guess that's inconvenient when we're puffing out our chests and lecturing others about controlling their spending.
The economic downturn has hit red and blue states equally as hard. Texas is now projecting a $27 billion deficit that was covered up by Republican golden boy Rick Perry during the last election, but I suppose conservatives will find a way to blame that on Dems even though the state has been in Republican control for decades.
Conservatives are going to have to accept that eventually tax rates will need to increase for the wealthy and for corporate America if we're ever going to seriously deal with these deficits at the federal and state level.
-
1
-
-
I have a bit of a beef with significant federal dollars going to provide Fargo with flood protection...isn't NoDak one of the few states with a surplus?
Philosophically what bothers me is that if the feds are expected to pay for something like this, what's to stop them from expecting NoDak to help bail out California? The two way street is dangerous.
Regarding healthcare, the bill really became insurance company legislation specifically targeted at for-profit payors. Removing single payor from the bill really changes the whole argument against the legislation away from death panels and access issues. It now is more of a business freedom issue regarding the mandates.
Taxpayers in states like California, Minnesota, and New York have essentially bailed out states like North Dakota for years. Why should ND taxpayers not return the favor? ND has received $2 for every dollar it pays federally for years while states like California and Minnesota have received at times as low as 50 cents on the dollar. It's always been a two- way street and the residents of ND have benefitted from it in far greater proportion than those in most other states.
-
1
-
1
-
-
It will be politically impossible for Berg or Hoeven to get flood protection money for Fargo. The Tea Party is standing strong on it's stance against earmarks in the House, so even if Berg gave a rats ass about Fargo (which he doesn't) he won't have the opportunity to get funding. In the Senate, with the Democrats having lost a number of key Midwestern seats and the general tone of this legislative session being deficit reduction, it's unlikely that Democratic leadership will be able to push for a bill that provides for substantial infrastructure projects.
The loss of our Democratic congressional delegation will hurt the state much more than most on this board realize. The state's strong economic shape is largely a result of the substantial federal tax dollars that flow into the state. Dorgan, Conrad, and Pomeroy have been instrumental in securing federal dollars for projects such as the research corridor and were some of the strongest advocates for the agricultural subsidies that sustain the livelihoods nearly all of the farmers in this state. Both programs are likely to be on the chopping block with a federal government that is becoming increasingly filled with conservatives who don't think the government should pay for anything except weapons and warfare.
-
The "Slum Lord" Rick Berg will serve ND well. I have known Rick since undergrad school and the guy is perhaps one of the scummiest opportunists I have ever met. Good luck with that liar as the Congessman.
Berg showed his true colors when he couldn't be bothered to attend a single meeting on flood control for Fargo. Flood protection will not get done unless ND pays for it. There will be no federal money for flood protection in a teabagger controlled U.S. House.
-
2
-
-
All I'm saying is the future success of Sioux hockey will be entirely contingent on the success of the entire athletic department. We can continue to devote all of our resources into men's and women's hockey and have a few more successful seasons but eventually be passed over by teams from athletic departments that are more devoted to all of their sports offerings or we can start spreading the wealth to position each of the school's athletic teams to be at the highest level attainable.
-
Five teams means 20 games with a home and away series at each conference mate. Also, nearly every team could do the same with Notre Dame if they don't include Notre Dame as an affiliate member initially. They'd also have an easy time getting home games as SCSU, UMD, Mankato, and Bemidji State would fall all over themselves to play a series at U of M each year with no return series. The Ohio and Michigan hockey schools would do the same with Michigan, Michigan State, and Ohio State as well. Any holes could be filled with series against Boston College and other Eastern hockey powers whose football teams have full FBS status. They'd even travel to play the Bowling Green's and Miami of Ohio's of the world before traveling to UND. In Division I sports, FBS football is such a distinguished brand that it dictates to a large extent the scheduling policies of the rest of the athletic department. College hockey fans will have to face the fact that power conferences call all of the shots in Division I athletics and college hockey will not be immune to this when a conference such as the Big Ten enters college hockey.
-
UND will continue to be a hockey school, regardless of the BTHC...if it happens. The rivalries between UM and WI will not go away and I highly doubt that UND would not get either of those schools to come to the REA for games even if a BTHC exists. If UND continues to compete for a NC year in and out, interest will always by high.
To the point that hockey interest will diminish because UND FB and BB might play Montana, USD, NDSU, UM or WI is almost laughable. The FB and BB teams need to put a decent product on the field/court to attract interest...playing a "big time" program and getting it handed to you doesn't and won't peak anyone's interest.
Yes, you are correct that a lot of this will rest with how competitive the FB and BB teams are more so than their opponents. However, it looks as though MBB is already starting to turn a corner and it's likely that with the appropriate resources FB could soon turn a corner as well.
It pains me to say this but NDSU and USD's victories over Minnesota drew more attention outside of the state than anything UND hockey has ever accomplished. Nearly all of my co-workers here in Minneapolis were talking about those games after they happend. It wasn't just Gopher fans or alumni but fans of Iowa, Notre Dame, and countless other universities. Tomorrow almost no one will be talking about this past weekend's hockey series.
Games with UM and WI will almost certainly go away once the BTHC comes into effect. The sole reason the Big Ten schools are even considering it is because schools like Wisconsin and Ohio State would like to distinguish their programs from those of other schools they feel are "inferior" to their own. This will mean refusing to travel schools like UND, Denver, and SCSU. They know they are the marquee names of college hockey and schools will line up to play in their buildings. They know UND will be no different.
-
The true test of whether hockey's reign as the premier collegiate sport at both UND and in the state at-large will come in the next five years after the BTHC is created. It's a very real possibility that you could see seasons in the future where both UND football and basketball have games at Wisconsin or Minnesota and hockey does not. I also predict that once the BTHC goes into effect you will never see another game against Wisconsin or Minnesota played in the REA. The hockey team will have to travel to those schools if they want to play them at all.
I think interest in Sioux hockey will diminish in comparison to others sports with a schedule full of the MInnesota Division II schools while the other sports are playing games against schools like Montana, USD, and NDSU.
-
1
-
-
lISTEN TO HAKS PRESS CONFERENCE, THERE IS A LINK TO IT ON THE SIOUXSPORTS HOME PAGE. THEN YOU CAN COME BACK ON HERE AND CALL HAK A STUPID UNIFORMED FAN LIKE THE REST OF US WHO DO NOTHING MORE THAN FIGHT FOR WHAT IS RIGHT..
If you read any of my previous posts then you'd know that I am first and foremost a Sioux football fan. If Hakstol actually supports this and wants to kill off the other programs then he is in fact stupid and uninformed. Nickname fans can keep up this nonsense but as soon as the hockey program actually suffers even a little from keeping the Sioux nickname the cries on this board to change the nickname will be deafening.
-
1
-
-
Are you aware that UND coaches have gone on the record as being supportive of Al Carlson's plan? Do they have their heads up their asses too? Are they idiots too? Sorry to come across as harsh, but I'm getting annoyed at the number of former nickname supporters that have bought into this paranoia nonsense. You don't even realize you are now helping the anti-nickname side by spewing this garbage. Please think about the fact that the coaches are supportive of this bill before you jump to any wild conclusions about imagined repercussions.
I haven't seen a single story that has quotes from UND coaches in support of Al Carlson's plan. If you have one please post the link.
I can't imagine any of the coaches coming out in support of this bill. If so, they are clearly not understanding the repercussions.
-
Well I guess I never really thought it would come to this. We now have a legislator, who graduated from NDSU, about to essentially put a bullet in the head of UND's athletic department while being cheered on by Sioux fans who have their heads so far up their own asses when it comes to this issue that they are completely blind to the repercussions that this will have on the athletic department.
If this bill passes our football, basketball, and other non-revenue sports will immediately be handicapped to the point that it will destroy any chances of remaining competitive for the foreseeable future. Hockey will probaby will not be hurt until the Big Ten hockey conference is formed and Minnesota and Wisconsin discontinue their series with us. Fan interest would ultimately be destroyed as UND will be relegated to also-ran status as a collegiate hockey program.
Eventually the whole university will be irreparably harmed by this decision and I'm sure at that point most of the idiot fans who thought this was an acceptable price to pay for the keeping the nickname will just move on and become fans of other teams. How do I know this? Well it's entirely apparent that some you never really gave a !@#$ about the school and the teams anyways so I have no doubt you'll abandon the school when things get really tough.
-
IMHO, Jones job is dependent on bringing in some inside talent. With any of the sophomores don't get a full ride next year: guess they will have to be satisfied with three years of having their room, board, and tuition paid. Wow, that would really suck if they only got three years of college fully paid for.
A lot of academic scholarships are dependent on performance, why not athletic scholarships? Should a coach continually get a contract renewed regardless of on-court performance? If the fan base is abandoning the team? Welcome to DI (and DII).
Guenther used to drop scholarships. So did Blais and almost any other coach worth his salt.
Jones has a choice, he can either cut some of these guys loose and use the scholarships to get players who are talented enough to play at this level or he can keep these guys on scholarship and lose his job. He really won't be doing any of the players a favor as any new coach that comes in will cut a lot of these guys loose as soon as he gets on campus.
-
Sorry if you didn't like the comment, but it applies. It isn't just about wanting to see FCS games. That is only a small part of it. I was referring to the attitude some people have that UND is so superior to all other schools that they don't have to deal with the same issues and problems. That losing to some schools is "unacceptable". Everything is wonderful if UND wins and horrible if UND loses. If a team has one of those "unacceptable losses", then the coach should be fired. If they win a game then the coach should be nominated for coach of the year.
As far as I can tell, most FCS schools are cash strapped to some extent. That is why so many play the FBS games. Many FCS schools aren't interested in the home and homes, and they don't want to take a reasonable FCS guarantee when they can either take a big payday from FBS or take in a big gate at home with a lesser opponent. Montana is a perfect example. They have had great success in FCS football but had major financial issues until they adopted that policy. Athletic directors have been saying that for the last couple of years. And to be perfectly honest, similar financial factors would have affected UND if they had stayed in DII. Whether you like it or not, finances are a part of the picture and are always going to affect the product on the field.
The greatest indictment of this argument comes from the two schools immediately south of us. NDSU and SDSU have both been able to fill their schedules since they became playoff eligible without resorting to playing Division II and NAIA schools. Why should a school the caliber of UND settle for such poor scheduling while lesser universities like NDSU and SDSU haven't had similar problems? The athletic department needs to get rid of the piss-poor excuses.
-
Is there any way to confirm the St. Cloud rumor? Ironic that a game with non-scholarship Drake would count for post-season but a game against a solid Div. II program with 30-something scholarships does not.
Other than the post-season qualification issue, the St. Cloud game makes sense for all involved. Good crowd (SCSU will bring some fans), the Huskies are playing well lately so it's likely to be a competitive game, low payout on our part, the Huskies can bus here, coverage in the MSP media, etc...... If played on the open Sept. 1 date, this might be the first contest with the new mascot/nickname.
Well the rules state that a non-scholarship Drake counts for post-season and a solid D2 program with 30- something scholarships does not and if Faison wants to remain the AD he at least better start scheduling like he knows the rules.
Second, playing St. Cloud State does absolutely nothing for this program. All it does is set up a trap game that hurts our program whether we blow them out by 30 points or if we crap down our legs and lose. St. Cloud fans don't travel for anything other than hockey so likely this will be another game that won't draw flies and likely lose money for the athletic department. If we want to play teams with 30 scholarship let's play a MEAC or NEC team in Grand Forks and get a win that will actually count towards playoff qualification.
-
We absolutely NEED top stop scheduling NAIA and Division II schools. The program gains absolutely nothing from those matchups. If Faison can't figure this out then he needs to get his head out of his ass. This program will never attain the marquee level it's capable of as long as we continue to take such a backwards approach to scheduling. We don't even look like we're trying in comparison to the other Dakota schools.
-
Agreed on Sioux Falls...they will challenge us. Montana Western will not.
I'm sorry but if this program wants to get where it needs to be a school like Sioux Falls should not challenge us. Sioux Falls would not be competitive with 90% of FCS schools from the top four FCS conferences (MVFC,Big Sky, SoCon, and CAA). The school largely gets athletes that were not recruited by UND or NDSU. UND should win this game by three plus scores and any other outcome should be unacceptable to the players, coaches, and fans. The loss a season ago was probably the worse loss in recent Sioux football history and I really hope the players come out ready to rectify the absolutely disgraceful performance they put together the first time against this team.
-
To be quite honest, I think currently the Summit is a better mens basketball conference than the Big Sky. Oakland, who just beat #7 Tennessee and lost by one to #8 Michigan State. I don't think there is a team in the Big Sky can compare to Oakland and their athleticism. After this year when the Summit loses their 2 worst mens BB teams in Centenary and Southern Utah, it will only get better.
Montana's pretty damn good as they have wins over PAC-10 schools Oregon State and UCLA. I know they aren't as impressive as Tennessee and Michigan State but still pretty good victories. Personally I think Oakland will walk through the Summit this season so the fact that they have a strong team doesn't necessarily mean the conference as a whole is strong.
-
Don't see any $100k plus guarantee games on these schedules(final transition years for both NDSU and SDSU)....
NDSU's 2007 schedule...
9/8 vs SFA
9/15 vs SHSU
9/22 @ Central Michigan
9/29 @ Western Illinois
10/6 vs UCD
10/13 @ Mississippi Valley State
10/20 @ Minnesota
10/27 vs SUU
11/3 vs Illinois State
11/10 @ Cal Poly
11/17 @ SDSU
SDSU's 2007 schedule...
8/30 @Western Illinois
9/8 @YSU
9/15 vs UNI
9/22 vs Texas State
9/29 vs SFA
10/6 @ Georgia Southern
10/20 vs Cal Poly
10/27 @UCD
11/3 @Central Arkansas
11/10 vs SUU
11/17 vs NDSU
If I was a UND fan I'd want answers and I'd want them soon. I mean seriously SDSU had six full scholarship FCS schools at home in their final transition year.
What I don't get with your schedule is that right now is the optimal time to set yourself up for the future and get a good FCS home game or two for a future year so you can avoid the struggle we had initially in getting six home games when were playoff eligible.
This would have been the perfect year to try and get home and homes with other FCS schools outside of the Big Sky by traveling to their place this season. Suffering through a season with only four home games would have been better than this.
-
Another criticism I have of Faison is right now we don't have any FBS games scheduled after 2012. This hurts recruiting as most other FCS schools have FBS games lined up that they can sell recruits on and for the most part we don't have those right now. Plus, the regional FBS game that would generate the most interest (Minnesota) is probably out of the question until the 2017 season now since Minnesota has at least one FCS game schedule every season leading up to that. This is unfortunately giving me the impression that the guy just isn't working that hard.
-
I personally disgusted to see some of the posts by so called Sioux fans on here. Does anyone have a clue how tough it has been to schedule games as a transition team. True Sioux fans just need to hang in there one more year till we are done with transition. Everything is going to be fine. It sounds like a lot of these posters don't even go to games very often anyway. Frankly, the posters who are writing in and saying that they are done supporting Sioux football are embarrassing to our fan base. We really don't need them anyway. I really don't think they are trully Sioux fans anyway. I think they should find a different team to support because their kind of support isn't needed.
I understand how difficult it is to schedule games as a transition team, but to this point we've done a worse job than any of the other three Dakota schools. I also question how the athletic department decided to roll this out. If I were Faison I would have been very apologetic at the announcement and explained to our fans how nearly every measure was taken to get a full Division I schedule. I also would not have announced it this early as I would have waited as long as possible in hopes of finding replacement games for some of these home games.
The boastful claims about having the football schedule completed at the Big Sky announcement and the satisfaction he expressed today over having six home games just seems like a guy is out of touch and really doesn't understand what this program and the Division I move was all about.
-
I'll still buy my season tickets and I'll still make my annual donation since I support this program though thick and thin. Hell, I'll still buy season tickets again this season and donate the ones I can't use back to the athletic department for most games since my work schedule will once again only allow me to attend one or two games.
That being said, it causes me a tremendous amount of angst to see how far this program has fallen in the last five years. A loss to Sioux Falls wasn't conceivable five years ago, neither were a 3-8 season or a schedule with three NAIA schools. I just want this program to turn a corner and start giving us something to be excited about again.
Somebody's Lying
in UND Nickname
Posted
How many years would you be willing to face these sanctions? Even if they vote for the nickname the NCAA doesn't have overturn the sanctions since we have an agreement that we needed to get support before the deadline and it didn't happen. The NCAA would punish us indefinitely for this and there is nothing we or anyone on the Standing Rock Reservation could do about it.
I know your a Sioux hockey fan and thus probably don't give a !@#$ about the other sports on campus but just try to think about what this would do to the other sports on campus to have an indefinite ban on hosting postseason events. If this impacted hockey like it does the other sports the name would have been gone 2 years ago.