jimdahl

Athletic Department, Student Government reach student seating agreement

Since they go solely by regular season seeding, why wait until the playoffs end to announce it? However, this page does indicate that you're right, in saying:

A Pioneer Press article covering the NHL playoffs noted: If Zach goes late first-round, as is often predicted, it could be a moderately successful playoff team that grabs his rights. Here's another chance for someone to teach me something new-- how do the Wild know they will have the #20 pick (as indicated earlier in this thread)? I thought 1st round picks below #15 weren't determined until the Stanley Cup Playoffs end?

A Gopher fan coming to a thread about UND's potential NHL draftees to post nothing but a list of Gopher players and a smiley face is most certainly an attempt at taunting/trolling, and it's really not welcome here. Back on topic -- anyone have any insights on why Beaverson wouldn't have opted in (or did his stock plummet so much that he fell of the list)? I thought that since he hadn't yet started playing in college that he could opt-in without losing NCAA eligibility, despite being 18. Or would opting in affect his USHL eligibility, since he does intend to return to the Gamblers next season?

Final NHL central scouting rankings are out (mid-term in parens for comparison): 9 (11) Zach Parise 51 (44) Matt Smaby * (98) Luke Beaverson 148 (153) Chris Porter 183 (176) Brady Murray * - hasn't yet opted in, so could replace one of the blank placeholders at #92, 95, or 107 Keep in mind that these are rankings for N.A. skaters, so actual draft position will be considerably lower when you add in Europeans and netminders.

Star2city pointed this out in the D-IAA forum, which I know a lot of people avoid. Today's GF Herald reported: I guess the thought is that UND will still be competitive until NDSU has had quite a few years to ramp up scholarships/build up the team. Good news for Sioux/Bison rivalry fans everywhere.

I agree that there has to be some sort of external stimulus or catalyst, but I think having a new President who hasn't yet confronted the issue is what allows it to get traction. I would argue that there are frequent catalysts, but that they now don't elicit as big a reaction because the current administration has already studied the issue and made its conclusions. Drop in a new administration, and the first name issue to arise becomes a big concern. As was pointed out when the homecoming incident took place, that sort of incident was not quite as isolated or unique as a lot of people liked to claim. I suspect under Clifford it would've led to some stern warnings and maybe some new policies on punishments for future such incidents; I think only because it was a new President, Baker, in office that it led to another study of whether the nickname was still suitable. Similarly, I don't think Strinden's release of the new logo (without having first run it by the President) coincidentally took place under a new President. In hindsight, the timing of that release had a lot do with REA, but I would argue there were definite back-room political considerations and close watching of Presidential opinion and power. Unrelated to the name, I hope Kupchella stays. From far away he seems to have done a great job of managing and smartly growing the school. If he leaves, I honestly hope you're right and I'm wrong, PCM, but I'm not completely convinced

Kupchella's alma mater contacted him and he's interested in interviewing, according to the Grand Forks Herald. Why is this significant in the Sioux Name forum? Upon the arrival of each of the last two new Presidents, the name-change crowd has raised a furor, recognizing that they have a new, possibly more sympathetic, audience. Baker soundly supported the name, though I believe that's when the Blackhawk logo was dropped and the "be racially sensitive" announcement began at sporting events. Kupchella had not completely made up his mind, but was apparently not leaning "pro-name" enough, when the State Board of Higher Ed intervened and demanded that UND keep the name. It will be interesting to see what evolves IF Kupchella leaves and a UND gets a new President (still a very speculative situation, at this point).

Here's a thread discussing what is known so far.

Maybe I just haven't made my question clear. You (WYO) said: What I've been asking and still want to know, so I and other readers can properly weight what you've "found", is what are these experiences that have let you comment on how well known UND is? Every response of yours has seemed to be misdirection away from and avoidance of that question. Have you actually been asking a substantial sample of people about whether they recognize UND's name so you could compare it's name recognition to that of NDSU, or is your comparison based entirely on your own conjecture about how well known you think UND should be?

The student senate's concern (based on the GF Herald article only) seemed to be the loss of lower bowl seats. The senate's proposed "compromise" did include specified non-standing seats for students, so that doesn't seem to be the sticking point. Why didn't the originally negotiated deal give the students a couple more rows in section 110 (so students would have the same number of lower bowl seats)?

Yeah, kudos to you on questioning it/noticing that there was still one step to go. Like I said, I assumed it was a done deal because the Student Body President brokered the deal. Apparently the Senate has other ideas. I wonder if the Senate has any new demands for a deal they would ratify, or if they're going to participate in future negotiations, or if they're just going to sit back and evaluate deals after they're made. There could also come a point at which the student government starts to look petty for not accepting the deals it has brokered (though I'm definitely not saying they're to that point yet).

No one answered because we didn't know anything more. The Student Senate is a mysterious organization that few of us alums have connections into (too much turnover). The Dakota Student article did mention that the Senate would review it this weekend, but since the Student Body President was among the drafters of the agreement, I just assumed the students would go for it. I wonder what'll happen now. It seems like letting the students agree to a move is just a courtesy (unlike in the old Ralph where the students actually owned their blocks of seats). However, at this point, doing anything without a compromise will be horrible PR.

Repeating your claims a second time doesn't make them more convincing; why don't you actually assuage my doubts by addressing my questions as to how and why you gathered data on how well known UND is? I understand why you talked about NDSU, but why were you polling people on whether they've heard of UND? If you weren't, how can you possibly know how well-known UND is relative to NDSU? Either you are VERY obsessed with UND to the point that you actually polled a useful sample of people about how well they know UND, or you're just making it up. Also, my only reference to hockey was agreeing with Kent that it's less popular than FB and BB. What I did say was that 90% of the people who are fans enough of D2 football to have heard of NDSU for winning some titles back in the 80s will have also heard of UND who has been much more of a recent success in D2 football.

I agree that being affiliated with a school should increase paid attendance over what a junior league team gets. Here's a question to which I should know the answer but don't: Do small programs like the CHA schools charge their students for admission? Students will clearly play a role in attendance, but I don't know if there will be much of a revenue impact from that attendance.

The quote I was responding to wasn't from your post, Kent. I (as any reasonable person would) agree 100% with your point that football and basketball are infinitely more popular than hockey outside of N.D. However, I'm still calling B.S. on Wyo's blanket statement that NDSU is better known nationally than UND. I just don't believe his UND obsession runs so deep that he actually gathered the data. It wasn't my point, but as far as football notoriety, 90% of the people who follow D-II football enough to know that NDSU won some titles back in the 80s will have heard of UND who's been a D-II football champ much more recently.

This really sets off my B.S. meter. I just don't buy that you said to multiple people at Clemson football games, "I went to NDSU," they responded "oh, good D-II football team." And that you then proceeded to say, "Ever hear of UND?" To which they responded, "Nope, I knew there was an NDSU but have never heard that there was a University of North Dakota". How can a Bison fan claim that they're not jealous of UND's national reputation, but then also claim that they were sampling people in other regions on whether they've heard of UND? I believe that you talked about NDSU because you went there, but if you were really grilling people on whether they've heard of UND, your obsession runs deep, my friend.

OK, no surprise here, but the WCHA unanimously admitted UND's women's hockey program to the conference for the 2004-05 season. Notice that the WCHA annual meeting was held in Marco Island, FL. What, not Grand Forks or Minneapolis in April? What WCHA office is in Florida? Is this a hint -- will the 'Noles be joining the WCHA soon? I've gotta get myself appointed a WCHA official somehow...

I don't know, but I have an Internet USHL.com tells me that Stampede average attendance is 4129.

Here's a reference for the student seats being assigned in 110 and standing not allowed in today's Dakota Student. *Like all DS articles, it will expire in 5 days (May 6).

That's what I think is great about having a starting framework based on similar programs (thanks for all the legwork, star2city!) We now realize that they'll either have to sell 5000 tickets at $15 in year 5, or they'll have to somehow reduce costs below $1.7M to break even. I actually feel like this framework has reinforced my point that hockey is an expensive program to run. Most cost-cutting solutions (e.g. scholarship reductions) can also hurt revenues. Sure, lots of schools manage to make money by selling more than 5000/18/$15 (such as UND's obscene 11000/24), but it's certainly no guarantee in SD. USD's 2002 football attendance was only 4000 and BB was 2500.

It's true that the students in 111 will be able to stand (with a few empty rows at the top of the section). The student seats in 110 will be assigned via a lottery system, and seat owners will know that standing could result in the loss of the assigned seat.

I disagree. And: All from the Forum. I repeat: NDSU administration was hoping very much that other NCC schools would follow their lead.

To claim that the NDSU administration didn't greatly desire the elite of the NCC to follow NDSU to D-IAA after their announcement is to deny history. At the press conference announcing the move they even announced that they were voluntarily waiting an EXTRA year before the prohibitively long probation period in the hopes that other NCC schools might reconsider.

That's what I said -- the Big Sky is a weak mid-major conference so they'd get thumped by any good D-I basketball team or D-I football team (which is why they play D-IAA football instead of D-IA). In fact, my point was that despite being a mid-major, they're the dream target for even lower schools looking to move up to that level. Similarly, I say the argument that USD shouldn't consider joining D-I hockey because they wouldn't be in the WCHA or immediately be competitive with UND or UMN is ridiculous.