MplsBison

Softball has a nice market in ND too. A nice club market. Lacrosse will never be popular outside the large schools in ND, if it even comes to that. As I said, that's a cub sport. It should not be sponsored by the NDHSAA unless small schools are playing it too. As long as the NDHSAA still sponsers BB and FB, and they always will until the end of time, then NDSU and UND should have BB and FB teams. The NDHSAA will drop ice hockey long before it ever dropped bb or fb. So I don't think you want to go down that road!

I can safely say that I would still oppose it because I know as fact that the NDHSAA would add the sport if it ever became that popular. Simply put, there won't ever be a sport in the country, let alone in this state, that is going to catch fire with the young people that the NDHSAA doesn't already sponsor. Lacrosse will never be more popular than softball in the state of North Dakota. Club sport at best. And that being the case, I don't want ND public schools putting money into it.

The mission of NDSU and UND is to serve the students of North Dakota. If we also serve the students of other states, like Minnesota, then fine. But first and foremost are ND students. If ND students aren't playing softball then I don't want NDSU being a softball haven for Minnesota and California kids who didn't get picked up by colleges in those states.

Correct, the NDHSAA does not support softball. Once again: my opinion on this is that no NDUS school should have a sport that isn't sponsered by the NDHSAA.

If he wants to stay in the state of ND and play at the top level of NCAA playoff football, maybe he should consider a transfer to NDSU?

I believe the NCAA wants to punish UND for playing in the Englestad Arena because Mr. Englestad was a Nazi supporter. They'll bend the rules in whatever way they see fit to make sure UND will not be known as the Fighting Sioux in the future.

My opinion on this is that no NDUS school should have a sport that isn't sponsered by the NDHSAA.

Cal Davis Cal Poly SUU UND USD San Diego That makes 6. You'd have to let in SD without scholarships and they'd have to want to leave the PFL. That also assumes that SUU doesn't get snatched up by the Big Sky, which I am hoping does happen. That would eliminate the need for the Summit to add UVSU. But, if UVSU adds football, then the GWFC can add them and you'd be back at 6.

We have to do that because of the damn blue walls and blue seats.

It's not as if UND is on top of the NDUS funding food chain. You guys are getting screwed out of your fair share as well. It's all those little bastards (Mayville ,etc.) that screw things up. There should be no way that Kelley fights us on this. Especially when he came from a state where there was only one show in town (UW).

UND will count as a DI victory for NDSU starting in 2009. There is no argument for waiting until 2012.

Using the game as leverage to get something we were always supposed to have is not extortion.

It's quite obvious that Taylor himself did not say those things and that those words were the Forum's agenda. You can see that Taylor's actual quotes are a bit more open than the Forum's added words. For example, what Taylor actually said was: "It depends on who you talk to," Taylor said. "I wouldn't say there's an overwhelming majority who want to see it renewed." And then the Forum spun that into their own, added words: Gene Taylor, the NDSU athletic director, said the Bison have no plans to play the Sioux in any sport. Some of the NDSU teams have no room in their schedules and there's not enough interest among fans and alumni in resuming the series, he said. No he didn't say that. Those were not the actual quotes used by him in print.

Excellent. A new president and a new AD who have no prior experience with the NDSU/UND rivalry. Sounds like the perfect recipe to let the bad blood wash down the Red to Winnipeg and restart one of the greatest rivalries in the nation!

There is nothing wrong from profiting from high gasoline prices. People refuse to change their driving habits, even when gas is $3.50/gal. $4-4.50/gal, OTOH, I think people will finally stop driving.

They may be rich, but they aren't rich enough to stop the inevitable.

Exactly. For most people, like you, $4.50/gal. is going to hurt somewhat. "No pain, no gain" as they say.

I'm sure a lot of people hope that is true. Myself, I'm hoping it gets up to about $4.50/gal and stays there. That'll turn the heat up on developing alternatives. Once we have alternatives in place, everything is gravy after that. It's just getting there that is going to suck.

Well, hunting is a luxury. Enjoy it while you can afford it, I guess.

No one is telling anyone to do anything. If you want a to be a typical person who resists change for the sake of resisting change, then by all means continue driving your 6000 lbs. 6L V10 truck, even though you don't use it for anything more than transportation, at $4.50/gal.

Do either of these two have plans on turning VCSU into a two year college? That would be ideal.

Well said. I'm actually happy that gasoline and diesel are costing so much now a days. It puts on more pressure to develop alternatives.

4.3 billion barrels: http://www.in-forum.com/News/articles/197544 Using the 20 million barrels/day figure from above, that would be 215 days worth of oil. Ok, so we get relief for a year and then we're right back to the problem of foreign dependence. The answer is clear as day: nuclear power plants with supplements from wind and solar for the prime energy source. Hydrogen or improved battery technology for energy carriers in consumer vehicles.

The athletic director is like the head coach of the football team. He is not out there coaching individual players (at least that's not what Bohl does) and he is not coordinating plays. His coaches do that. Likewise, an AD is not running individual programs. His head coaches do that.

It looks to me that the committee has made it clear: Bollinger missed his chance and will not be considered for the job.