Hammersmith

Or a date.

Siouxswim1 is at least somewhat correct. Four UND athletes were arrested at a GF bar on the 2nd for being underage. Three from soccer and one from football(though not one currently on the roster). Like jdub27 keeps saying, public records aren't hard to verify. Not making value judgements or suggesting the story about a fight is accurate, just validating what's in the public record. Also, the police were called to either the Toasted Frog or Joe Black's three times that night for fighting or helping kick people out at the end of the night, but I have no idea if the two were connected.

Thanks. My memory was positive it was $10M, but my quick Google search only found the HPF press release and that didn't include the other million.

Don't be too jealous compared to NDSU. While it's true that Sanford Health donated $10M for the BSA renovation, Altru Health donated $9M to UND for HPF. On the other hand, Sanford Health donated over $20M to SDSU($10M for the football stadium, $10M for their IPF, and a good sized chunk of the $6M Dykhouse Center). They also donated $20M to USD for their athletic facilities complex(but not the Dakota Dome remodel, I believe.)

Correct. Sometimes a PWO will sign a NLI as part of a signing ceremony, but it's a meaningless document for them. The NLI is a legal document, but it requires a scholarship offer to make it valid. No scholarship means no valid NLI. No valid NLI means no obligation for the student-athlete to actually attend the university in question.

HS JV OL & ST coach from a Milwaukee suburb. Played OL for UW-Eau Claire in the early 2000s. On the UND staff for at least a while, but the webpage is now 404. http://fhsgridironclub.weebly.com/coaching-staff.html http://www.fightingsioux.com/ViewArticle.dbml%3FDB_OEM_ID%3D13500%26ATCLID%3D204891108 Cached partial quote from google from the above link: "Prior to UND, Kubes worked as a high school football coach at various schools in the state of Wisconsin. Most recently he served as the head..."

Klieman is sitting at $450k right now, and could hit $475k this year with a NC. Math based off the 2016 contract that's still in force: Base salary of $325k($300k in 2016 with min 4% raise every year) + $25k personal appearance fee + $75k media appearance fee($65k in 2016 with $5k increases every year) + $10k for 8 wins + $10k for MVFC title + $5k for each NCAA home game($5k so far, $15k possible) + possible $15k for NC. He's also got a 1-time payment of $50k coming if he's still an NDSU coach on Jan 5. A big part of the contract is that NDSU assistant coaches must be paid salaries that are in the top 10% of FCS. Here's data that's a little old(2015-16 academic year): The average men's HC FTE salary at NDSU was $209k; UND's was $139k. The average men's assistant FTE salary at NDSU was $96k; UND's was $68k. That's men's coaches across the board; football, hockey, basketball, track & field, etc. It works out that NDSU pays roughly 40-45% more than UND on average. It's probably a bit worse than that in football as it's NDSU highest paid sport, and UND's second or third. NDSU's coordinators(highest paid assistants overall) are probably in the $150k range(+/-$20k). While Bubba is almost certainly being paid more, I doubt an offer of $205k would be something to jump at. (The GFH didn't publish the entire contract like the FF did with Klieman's, so a full apples to apples is a bit hard to do.) Just things for people to think about.

Nope, no more details because the EWU board is using the same source. They link to the same tweet from the scout, and a news article about the same stadium plans. So far, everything comes back to that same questionable tweet.

Snopes would grade his claim as mostly false. On Jan 17 of this year, a freelance HS scout from the northwest claimed in a tweet that the CWU president announced that the university intended to become a "DI FCS capacity school by 2020-2021". When asked by others for a source, the scout didn't reply. So two big problems. First, we have no confirmation that the president actually said this. The tweet mentions a video interview and a press release. But because the scout didn't reply, we don't know who the interview was supposedly with and can't confirm it. And there's no record I can find of the press release. The current CWU website doesn't go back that far, and a google news search of January doesn't turn up anything. You'd think something this big would have caused some ripples that google news would have picked up. Second, the president is only claimed to have said to be going for DI FCS capacity. There's a big difference between being ready for FCS and anticipating an invite is coming. Volley will likely claim that why would a president set a date without having insider knowledge of an invite. I would counter by suggesting that a big goal needs a time target or it's just a wish, not a goal. And that 2020 is both a nice round number and something somewhat achievable. Why might CWU be considering this? Well, they need a backup plan. With Humboldt State dropping football next year(it was only confirmed in July, but it was being talked about in Jan), that only leaves four FB teams left in the GNAC. There are some mild stadium upgrades going on now* that you can infer to mean that CWU plans to keep football. So something's gotta give. Either the GNAC needs more FB teams, or CWU needs to change division. I suspect their preferred choice is to get more DII FB teams, but they can't count on that. So, was Volley truthful? Not really. As is his MO, he stretched a questionable nugget of info past its breaking point and twisted the truth into a falsehood. IMO, of course. *There's a $10.4M project going on, but it's mostly just a refresh. The football stadium is getting new turf and lights, plus some minor amenity upgrades like renovated entry gates, bathrooms, and box office. The stadium upgrades will allow soccer and rugby to use the facility(expanding the field size by removing the surrounding track). The rest of the project is a new outdoor T&F facility with a recreational field in the infield. https://mobile.twitter.com/NW_Spotlight/status/953756990056022016 http://www.cwu.edu/north-campus/

I just read through the relevant parts of the manual, and I don't think that's the case. I don't see anything special about football in regards to the MBB autobid. It looks like it's theoretically possible to do a office swap like the A-10 and CAA did years ago, and the result would lock down the Summit autobid. Whether or not you could convince the other members of the MVFC to go along with that is another question. Here are the relevant sections. If I've missed something, please correct me. 31.3.4.5 Additional Requirements—Basketball. To be considered eligible for automatic qualification in basketball, a member conference must be a core conference (see Bylaw 31.02.3) and must meet the requirements of Bylaw 20.02.5. 31.02.3 Core Conference. A core conference is a multisport conference that has been elected to membership and, as a result of legislation, is identified in the applicable sections of Constitution 4 related to representation in the NCAA governance structure. 20.02.5 Multisport Conference. A Division I multisport conference shall satisfy the requirements of this section. 20.02.5.1 Minimum Number of Members. A multisport conference shall be composed of at least seven active Division I members. The member conference shall include at least seven active Division I members that sponsor both men’s and women’s basketball. 20.02.5.2 Sports Sponsorship. A multisport conference shall satisfy the following requirements: (a) The conference shall sponsor a minimum of 12 Division I sports; (b) The conference shall sponsor a minimum of six men’s sports, one of which shall be men’s basketball. In addition to men’s basketball, the conference shall sponsor football or two other men’s team sports. A minimum of seven members shall sponsor men’s basketball. A minimum of six members shall sponsor five other sports, including football or two additional men’s team sports; and (c) The conference shall sponsor a minimum of six women’s sports, one of which shall be women’s basketball. In addition to women’s basketball, the conference shall sponsor two other women’s team sports. A minimum of seven members shall sponsor women’s basketball. A minimum of six members shall sponsor five other sports, including two additional women’s team sports (or a minimum of five members for an emerging sport for women). 20.02.5.3 Regular-Season Conference Competition. Multisport conference members shall participate in regular-season conference competition, subject to the following requirements: (a) Basketball teams shall participate in a regular-season conference schedule of a double round robin, inseason competition, or a minimum of 14 regular-season conference contests; (b) In football or in a minimum of two men’s team sports other than men’s basketball [as required in Bylaw 20.02.5.2-(b)], teams shall compete in a minimum regular-season conference schedule of five contests. A minimum of five regular-season conference contests must be hosted by one of the two competing teams at its home venue; and (c) In a minimum of two women’s team sports other than women’s basketball (as required in Bylaw 20.02.5.2), teams shall compete in a minimum regular-season conference schedule of five contests. A minimum of five regular-season conference contests must be hosted by one of the two competing teams at its home venue. 20.02.5.4 Continuity. A multisport conference shall establish continuity. To establish continuity, a multisport conference must meet the requirements of Bylaw 20.02.5.1. In addition, the conference must meet the requirements of Bylaws 20.02.5.2 and 20.02.5.3 for a period of eight consecutive years.

Yes. Parents are Don and Donita. Both former VCSU athletes. Really nice kid(though it's been about three years since I spent time around him).

Don't know about that. Dairy Queen's are pretty horrid as well. Only time I get DQ fries are with a chicken strip basket that includes gravy. Enough of that gravy and the fries are edible. (It's no patch on Big Boy gravy from Bismarck, but that's a little too far to drive for fast food.)

Surprised that no one has pointed out that Hornbacher's fate is a little uncertain at the moment. Current Supervalu leadership is in the end stage of a proxy fight for control of the company. If Blackwells Capital gets their way(Supervalu's largest single investor at 7.3%), they will oust SV's current leadership and replace them. The shareholder vote is set for Aug 16, and SV was concerned enough earlier this year to start talking to competitors about selling out rather than allowing Blackwells to take control. https://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/news/2018/07/03/date-set-for-supervalu-blackwells-proxy-showdown.html

Just want to point out that it's 40% of women's teams, not 40% overall. So if we assume that virtually 100% of men's teams are coached by males*, and we assume that there are about as many men's teams as women's teams**, then we're actually looking at roughly 80% male head coaches and 20% female head coaches overall. That much disparity suggests a problem somewhere in the system. Not enough women getting into coaching? Women getting overlooked in hiring? Women getting glass ceilinged out of the head coaching jobs? Too many men getting into coaching for the number of men's jobs available? Personally, I suspect it's a combination of all of those. There's a surplus of men in coaching. Most of the hiring is done by male athletic directors. You get hired in coaching due to who you know. You hire based on what you think are the most important factors, which may or may not be accurate. So an athletic director(who is probably male) is going to hire someone with the same viewpoint(which is more likely to be someone of the same gender) and is first going to look at people they know(which are likely to be dominated by the same gender). Male + male + male doesn't leave many jobs for women. Full disclosure so certain poster here doesn't get their shorts in a bunch: NDSU has had its share of these problems itself. I think the women's golf coach has regularly flipped between genders because it wasn't/isn't a full-time position, but I could be wrong. Lynn Dorn really wanted a female soccer head coach(that was a big reason for the contract dispute that resulted in the previous coach leaving), but when the applicants came in, they were forced to hire another male. Gender was also a reason why Hinterstocker(VB) was let go so quickly and why the next two VB coaches have been women. It's also a reason why the WBB coaches have had long leashes(terribly inappropriate imagery to use there, but that's the saying). NDSU would have a female softball coach if Dorn had her way, but his success has been so great that you can't let him go if he doesn't want to leave. And T&F/CC is such a combined group of coaches that the women's head coach is more or less just a title and not so much of a job. *I believe that there are one or two men's teams with female coaches in DI, but the number is so small to make no statistical difference for this post. **Don't know how accurate this is, but it's probably actually something like 55/45 women's. Again, not enough to make a difference in this rough case.

FYI, UND just requested to start fundraising for Phase 2. 117,000 sqft and $35M. http://ndus.edu/uploads/resources/8832/summary-und-hpc-phase-ii-fundraising.pdf http://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/4443710-und-athletics-focus-shifts-second-phase-high-performance-center Apologies if it's already been posted. Didn't see it after a quick search of the obvious threads. Found it because NDSU requested the same fundraising authorization for two IPFs. One small one($2M - 11K sqft) just for softball, and a main one($37.2M - 120K sqft) for most everything else but T&F. NDSU's main field will be much smaller than the HPF(85K sqft vs 195K), but NDSU doesn't need the track since they have a separate indoor facility just for that. Never realized how much the track balloons out an IPF until I did the math. The FB field portion of the HPF only works out to 57,600 sqft. The remaining 135K+ sqft is all for T&F space plus a buffer around the perimeter. Don't know for certain if NDSU's will be a 100yd field like SDSU's or a full 120yd field like UND's, but either is mathematically possible at this point.

What the heck, I'll answer this one to the best of my abilities. The terms of the deal have been publicized numerous times in the past, so I think I'll get it pretty close, though I might be wrong in a couple details. NDSU owns the land the Fargodome sits on. NDSU agreed to a 99-year lease of the land to the city of Fargo for $1(per year?) in exchange for limited free rent. NDSU gets a certain number of days per year free of charge, then can choose to rent extra days at a preferential rate. I believe the number of free days is something like 15/year, though I could be off by a little. I think it's two days per regular season home game plus one day for spring graduation. As to the gate, NDSU gets 100% of the ticket revenue for everything except the suites(18 suites x 16 ticket each or 288 tickets total). The Fargodome keeps all of the suite revenue. Team Makers gets 100% of the seating fees. I believe NDSU gets a cut of the concessions, but the FD keeps the majority of that(something like an 80/20 split?). The FD gets most or all of the parking revenue from the regular lots. Team Makers rents the tailgating lots from the FD and pays for extra security, but gets 100% of the tailgating parking pass money. As far as advertising goes, I think the FD keeps all money specific to the FD, while NDSU keeps all money specific to NDSU football. For example, if Cloverdale Meats pays to put their logo on the FD scoreboard, that money goes to the FD. But if they pay to put their logo on the Bison FB banner that runs the length of the sideline behind the bench, then I believe that goes to NDSU. But don't hold me to this paragraph; I could easily be wrong. While some of the particulars may have changed a bit over the years(number of free dates, rates for additional days, cut of concessions, etc.), I believe the fundamental deal has been the same from the beginning. I'm not taking a side in the Kennedy/McGrady fight, just clearing up the NDSU/FD stuff. Carry on.

My opinion as an outsider is that there are a few different reasons depending on the poster involved. Some view it the same as NDSU fans did back in the early 2000s. Back then, we didn't know many FCS-level schools, and that list pretty much started and ended with Montana and Montana State. So when it came time to look for a conference, it was pretty much a given that we would look to the Big Sky. Quite honestly, it was a decision made in ignorance. I don't mean that in a bad way, just that we were uninformed when it came to DI/FCS. We latched onto the only thing we knew rather than educate ourselves as to whether it was the best situation or not. You guys were a little better off since you were able to watch us for those first four years, but I often see signs of the same attitude in UND posters that NDSU posters once had. A second reason has to do with Douple(Summit commissioner) and the Fighting Sioux nickname. Many have not, and will never, forgive him for trying to get UND to drop the nickname. I know that some(most?) on here disagree, but I still think he was working with Kelley and was actually trying to help the school. But for those emotionally invested in the nickname, they want nothing to do with him. Their hatred of Douple extends to the conference as a whole. Then there are a few who like the idea that UND got into the Big Sky when NDSU tried and failed to do the same. I don't think there are all that many UND fans that have that view as their primary or only reason for wanting to stay in the Big Sky, but I think there are more than a few that view it as a nice bonus when added to better reasons. As an outsider, the whole "peer institutions" argument just seems fishy. I believe most of the posters using it do believe in what they're saying, but I just have a feeling that they are lying to themselves. I think they actually fall into one of the cases above(especially the first), but try to latch onto a reason that sounds better to themselves. But that's just opinion on my part based on some observations over the years(mainly that their reasons for staying in the Big Sky keep changing, and that "peer institutions" is the current flavor).

Exactly the same folks. I believe the FB numbers from that era just as equally as the BB numbers; i.e. not at all. Some of those reported crowds were ridiculous, and not in a good way.

There's a big difference between going from 2k to 3.5k, and going from 3.5k to 7k. You need to face that UND will never be a strong basketball school. You don't have a large enough fanbase to support two major sports in the same season. As long as hockey is king, basketball will never be big. The fanbase size problem is no different at NDSU. Our advantage in this particular case is that our #1 sport does not directly compete with basketball, though football playoffs do mean some overlap. I would argue that UND's MBB ceiling is about where NDSU is now. But I'd also argue that NDSU has one or maybe two more possible steps beyond the current level. I'm pretty confident about my views, but feel free to disagree. I do think the Summit would be a modest upgrade for you guys and get you near that 3k(average) neighborhood.

Yep. It's hard to draw an accurate conclusion, but about 5k is the most likely best-case for now. The accuracy problem comes from the BSA being a miserable place to watch a game, to an off-campus facility, to a new facility with the novelty factor. I could see us averaging 5500 this season, but is that a real demand or just an artifact of a brand new facility? Only time will tell. I think MBB was actually doing better before the football run. Those runs have drained a lot of money and time out of the wallets and schedules of fans. Both of our schools have very passionate fanbases, but they aren't particularly large. At least by medium/big DI standards.

Again, take that 8k number with a huge grain of salt. Those were estimated crowds in those days, and there are big questions as to how accurate those estimates were. When the BSA switched from estimated to ticketed attendance, that number dropped dramatically overnight. Take that for what you will. Besides, those were the days of M/W doubleheaders on Friday and Saturday nights. Those days aren't coming back. 5700 is indeed a bit too small, but expansion is not an option in the current structure. The best capacity for NDSU would be around 8000 to allow for plenty of growth, but it will take quite awhile for NDSU basketball to need that kind of space on a regular basis. I think we'd need a Sweet Sixteen run and probably a better conference(no, that doesn't mean the Big Sky or the WAC ) It's not really the 5700 that's the problem, it's the lack of good luxury seating. But there just wasn't a way to do it within the current structure. (Remember that keeping the steel saved at least $12M.)

BSA (original): ~8000 (take this number with a big grain of salt; more likely no more than 7000 at its max) BSA (pre-remodel): 5830 SHAC: 5700

Oh, and the scoreboard ring isn't going to be added. The rendering was created not too long after a new scoreboard was added. That's the scoreboard in the rendering. That scoreboard had video panels on two sides and fixed ads on the other two. Fairly late in the plans(late spring/mid summer), they decided to get a new, larger scoreboard with video panels on all four sides.* The ends are square-ish(7'x9') and the sides are rectangular(7'x18'). That's the scoreboard in the picture, covered in plastic wrap. I hope they'll be able to raise it up a little more for games. Remember that the SHAC is still under construction and much of it isn't in its finished form yet. The only reason they had the open house was because they needed to get the season tickets assigned. Ticket holders were given times to come in based on priority points and choose where they wanted to sit. In a perfect world, that wouldn't have happened until construction was done, but construction is behind schedule and the ticket office had to get that info now. *http://www.gobison.com/news/2016/6/2/general-daktronics-video-displays-sanford-health-athletic-complex.aspx?path=general

Just to tidy up and pull together what others have said... The section on the top has no seating at the moment. Remember how there was a discussion this summer about keeping some of the old seating for budget reasons? Well, they found the money, but it's taken some extra time to get the new seats since they were ordered later than the rest. The old orange wooden seats were removed a month or so ago, and now they're waiting for the new green seats to arrive. If they're not here now, they will be in a few weeks. That section at the top is where they'll be installed. There are three types of seats in the SHAC. The south section of the lower bowl is bench seating. This is mostly student seating with one section of reserved. The rest of the lower bowl are padded chairbacks*. I'm not 100% certain about the new upperdeck, but they will likely be unpadded chairbacks(like the Fargodome or Alerus seats). All the lower sections can get pushed back against the wall(including the triangular sections). This exposes some practice courts. During the open house(where these pictures came from), the wood floor wasn't completed and the lower bowl couldn't be completely pulled out. That will affect the look of things a little. Figure each row is one or two inches from full extension. Altogether, that's a foot or three at the bottom. That's one of the reasons the stands look so far from the court. Also, notice the row of chairs between the court and the stands. That is the top price seating and I believe it will be two rows deep for games. There are also no team seats or scoring table and press table in this picture. All of that will crowd things in the final product. The final difference between this photo and the rendering is the camera angle. The photo is taken from the south end of the east stands looking WNW. The rendering is from the SW corner of the court looking NE; basically from where the guy in the yellow shirt is standing on the left side of the photo. The new SHAC is not a fantastic facility, but it's not bad considering the structural steel of the BSA couldn't be altered for cost reasons. It is what it is. *go here to see a close up of the lower seats: http://www.gobison.com/news/2016/5/27/general-sanford-health-athletic-complex-construction-update-may-2016.aspx

2.5% mostly across the board + the $75M left in the Budget Stabilization Fund + up to $100M from the Bank of ND.