Hammersmith

That quote from Grom doesn't make any sense. It should be 2022 for MBB and 2020 for everything else(but FB) if nothing changes from today. Maybe Grom knows something we don't(or the quote is partially out of context), but the NCAA manual is pretty clear on the subject. I'm puzzled.

Maybe a current UND student or faculty member could check if he's listed in the campus phone book. It's not 100% conclusive but it would be a strong indication. Of course, if you think that would be a breach of privacy, then disregard this.

Rock Band 2 for the PS3?

I just posted a version of this on the Jacks messageboard, so I'll keep it short. There can be no doubt after the last two televised games that NDSU is reporting paid attendance and not actual; there are just too many open seats. It looks exceptionally bad on TV because the worst offenders are the business and big-money season ticket holders between the 30's. The endzones and outer sections are nearly full, but the TV cameras don't show those areas as often as the center sections. I wish there was a better system in place for season ticket holders to turn in or sell their unused tickets, but who knows if it would work? Money-wise, the WIU game was a sellout but the student turnout was horrible; only about 2,000 of the 4,000 seats available. Those 2,000 missing students were the difference between the 17,000 reported and a standard 19,000 sellout. I never want to hear the students complain again this year because they can't get tickets like the first couple of home games. This was their chance to put up or shut up, and they blew it. And I ain't gonna argue with Sic's last post on Mertens. I'll withhold judgement on Landry for a while, though.

Any Given Saturday Poll Top 25 (First place votes in parenthesis), Points 1. James Madison (106) 3027 2. Appalachian St. 2711 3. Montana (7) 2709 4. McNeese St. (3) 2579 5. Cal Poly 2245 6. Richmond 2229 7. New Hampshire (3) 2166 8. Eastern Washington 1936 9. Wofford 1885 10. Northern Iowa 1827 11. Southern Illinois (1) 1796 12. Villanova (1) 1791 13. North Dakota St. 1675 14. Elon 1531 15. Furman (1) 1437 16. Delaware 1376 17. Massachusetts 1250 18. The Citadel 979 19. South Dakota St. 947 20. Central Arkansas 692 21. Western Illinois 631 22. Liberty 599 23. Jacksonville St. 356 24. Northern Arizona 271 25. Sam Houston St. 159 Others receiving votes (minimum of 5 votes): Georgia Southern (34), Hampton (28), Eastern Illinois (22), Montana St. (22), Tennessee St. (18), Prairie View A&M (17), William & Mary (16), Lafayette (13), Youngstown St. (13), Weber St. (12), Brown (7), San Diego (5), Tennessee-Martin (5) MOST SIGNIFICANT WIN OF THE WEEK: Villanova MOST SIGNIFICANT LOSS OF THE WEEK: Richmond

The Herald doesn't put their editorial cartoons on the website, do they?

Well, I hope Detroit is pissed that they have to travel to Chicago for the makeup game. I might be counting chickens a bit early, but it looks like we're down to two scenarios. If the White Sox win tomorrow, the winner of the tiebreaker wins the division. If they lose, the Twins win without needing the tiebreaker game. Go Tigers!

Mike Jacobs(publisher & editor of the Herald) gives his thoughts on the situation. He seems to have some personal experience with SCOMM. UND ends School of Communication crisis

Couple mistakes in there. 1. If the Twins win and ChiSox lose tomorrow, the Twins win the AL Central by 1.5 games and the postponed ChiSox/Tigers game does not need to be played. In all other cases, the ChiSox/Tigers game will have to be played. 2. Twins win and ChiSox win. ChiSox lose makeup game. Twins win division by 1 game. 3. Twins lose and ChiSox lose. ChiSox lose makeup game. Twins win division by 1 game. 4. Twins lose and ChiSox win. ChiSox win makeup game. ChiSox win division by 1 game. The next set will require the 1 game Twins/ChiSox playoff. 5. Twins win and ChiSox win. ChiSox win makeup game. Playoff winner wins division by 1 game. 6. Twins lose and ChiSox lose. ChiSox win makeup game. Playoff winner wins division by 1 game. 7. Twins lose and ChiSox win. ChiSox lose makeup game. Playoff winner wins division by 1 game. edit: guess someone beat me to it.

Just to avoid confusion, that info is referring to the NDSU/SIU game, not the UND/SIU game.

UND plans to dissolve School of Communication No faculty or majors will be cut; they will be split up among different existing departments. Thoughts? I'm not familiar enough with the SoC to know if this is a big deal or not. I know they've had issues in the past(very public ones), and it seems like the faculty and students feel the administrative stucture is too posioned to continue. There should be more info coming out tonight or in tomorrow's Herald. edit: updated link to the expanded story

A little shy of two years ago, I started keeping track of those kinds of numbers for fun. I'm not regular about it, and sometimes several months go by between my checks, but it is interesting to see the ebb and flow during the different sport seasons. On a yearly basis, SS is more active than BV, but the difference has shrunk greatly in the two years I've been watching. During hockey season, SS blows BV out of the water. Right now, it's about 4 to 1 the other direction. Over the summer, it's about even. There's no dispute that USD's online presence is poor(to put it kindly).

That 6-42 number is not even close to correct; I think it may be the reverse. I checked out the ACC & PAC-10 records versus FCS last year, and they were 7-0 alone.

9143

Homecoming. Notice how many of the top-ten occur in October?

1. 13,500 - NDSU - 6/10/01 (I don't trust this one - 13,500 exactly is too convienent) 2. 12,580 - UNO - 20/10/01 3. 12,276 - NDSU - 18/10/03 4. 12,202 - SCSU - 1/10/06 5. 12,148 - Augustana - 29/9/07 6. 11,696 - UCD - 1/12/01 7. 11,665 - UMD - 16/10/04 8. 11,563 - UNO - 13/10/07 9. 11,463 - MSU - 7/10/05 10. 11,434 - TAMUK - 28/8/08

Has Coulson ever wrote anything that hasn't had a glaring error in it?

That's not an assumption, that's a fact. The five-year average is 90% to 72%. The problem comes from using that fact alone to compare institutions. Unless you can show that the lower acceptance rate creates a higher-quality student body, or that the original pool of applicants is almost identical, then that fact alone is fairly meaningless. The added variable of students who are admitted but don't attend throws another huge variable into the mix.

Not necessarily. Since that category is 12-17 and has such a low percentage, it's likely that almost all those students have 17s and maybe a few 16s. UND's sliding scale for automatic admission goes down to an ACT score of 18 with a high school GPA of 3.5, so it's possible that a small number of applicants with an ACT score lower than 18 are accepted by the applications committee if they feel the student will succeed(high GPA, extracurriculars, letters of reference, etc.). It's doubtful that either school accepts anything lower than 16, even with the other factors.

Oxbow6, your argument is based on an assumption that is not supported by facts. That assumption is that the quality of the applicant pools are the same. We don't know that. There is also another factor that you are not considering. There are a significant number of students that are accepted to both universities that choose not to attend. That's another group that we know nothing about except their size. On average, 29% of students that are admitted to UND choose to go elsewhere(or don't go to college). What if that's the top 29%? It probably isn't, but it could be. The same thing can be said about NDSU(except it would be 40% in that case). There are just too many variables and not enough information to come to the conclusions you have. Again, your argument is only valid if you can show the quality, not the size, of the applicant pools are equal. To my knowledge, neither university releases that information. Therefore, unless you plan break into the registrar's offices at both campuses, we can never prove nor disprove your statements.

If that's one of the major factors(and I don't think it is), then it's something that would have to be added to the list of classic Kupchela blunders, since all it produced was a minor spike in GPA for a single year and a very slight reduction in the number of enrolled students scoring 12-17 on the ACT. And even that last trend has reversed itself and risen slightly. For UND's sake, I sure hope Kelley is less spin and more substance than his predecessor.

Making this a bit more general... A recruit who is determined to be academically ineligible for his/her first year faces these issues: The student-athlete may not: 1. Compete. 2. Practice with the team. 3. Receive athletic aid. 4. Work out under the supervision of the coaches of the student's sport. The student-athlete may: 1. Receive nonathletics need-based aid. 2. Work out under the supervision of the strength coarch or trainer. 3. Use the athletic department's training facilities. The other major difference is that the student-athlete will only have three years of playing eligibility unless s/he completes 80% of his/her degree program prior to his/her fifth academic year. And thanks for the kind words.

This is analysis: There are three groups of students in the first part of the above staistics: those that apply, those that are admitted, and those who enroll. Any discussion about the qualities of the first two groups at either institution is absolutely worthless. The only thing we know about those groups is their size. We can come to some conclusions about the third group because of the additional data. NDSU has a mild edge in student retention, while UND has a very small lead in graduation rates. NDSU has an advantage in high school GPA, but it's also very small. There are no strong trends in any of these stats. Most of the differences in the 25/75 percentile breakdown come from rounding errors. Any gap is rarely more than half a point, and the tiny leads change almost yearly. The score breakdowns are kind of interesting to look at, but they don't mean that much. NDSU has a few more students that score on the higher and lower ends, while UND students have a slightly increased tendancy for scores in the 18-23 range. The only strong trend in the stats is in final two categories. In both cases NDSU has stayed very constant, but fewer North Dakota students list UND as a choice(first or otherwise) each year. UND has lost 4.0% in first-choice selection and 7.3% in any-choice over the last four years. Anything beyond these points is unsubstantiated spin. Some have said that NDSU must accept lesser quality students because of the first set of numbers. The GPA, ACT, and retention numbers don't back that up. I could say that reason NDSU accepts more of its applicants is because NDSU attracts a higher quality of student. UND has to reject more applicants because it attracts sub-standard students. I don't believe that, but the data can point in that direction just as easily as the other. Without detailed information about the applicant and accepted groups, no conclusions can be reached in those areas. The data comes from the Common Data Sets(2003-2007) available on each schools' websites and the State Profile Reports available from ACT. UND's 2003-04 CDS Report(.pdf) UND's 2004-05 CDS Report(.pdf) UND's 2005-06 CDS Report(.pdf) UND's 2006-07 CDS Report(.pdf) UND's 2007-08 CDS Report(.xls) NDSU's 2003-04 CDS Report NDSU's 2004-05 CDS Report NDSU's 2005-06 CDS Report NDSU's 2006-07 CDS Report NDSU's 2007-08 CDS Report North Dakota's 2005 ACT Profile(.pdf) North Dakota's 2006 ACT Profile(.pdf) North Dakota's 2007 ACT Profile(.pdf) North Dakota's 2008 ACT Profile(.pdf)

Awww, somebody must want me to post more. These are facts: (Fall 2007 / 5 year average; 'students' refers to first-fime, first-year students only) Students that apply and are admitted: UND: 70%/72% NDSU: 85%/90% Students that are admitted who enroll: UND: 70%/71% NDSU: 58%/60% Students who return for a second year: UND: 75%/76% NDSU: 82%/79% Six-year graduation rates: UND: 54%/54% NDSU: 50%/52% High School GPA of enrolled students: UND: 3.36/3.37 NDSU: 3.39/3.37 ACT Composite scores of enrolled students: 25th Percentile UND: 21/20 NDSU: 20/20 75th Percentile UND: 26/26 NDSU: 25/26 ACT Composite score breakdowns: 30-36 UND: 5%/5% NDSU: 7%/7% 24-29 UND: 36%/36% NDSU: 38%/37% 18-23 UND: 55%/55% NDSU: 50%/51% 12-17 UND: 4%/4% NDSU: 5%/6% First-choice university percentages of students taking the ACT in North Dakota: (2008/4-year average) UND: 13.8%/15.8% NDSU: 17.5%/17.0% Any-choice university percentages of students taking the ACT in North Dakota: UND: 41.3%/45.3% NDSU: 46.5%/46.8%

Okay, this is getting out of hand. While Bison Dan has attacked UND in (many)other threads, his total contribution to this thread was "Time will tell won't it." That's it. No attacks on May. No comments toward his character or intelligence. And SirHinn only commented about the Herald's reporting, nothing attacking May. He actually has something of a point. It seems like at least one story in the Herald and Forum each month come from comments posted on here and BV. If this story ends up being accurate and covered in the Herald, it certainly wouldn't be the first or last time the paper got their "scoop" from here. It's a simple fact that student-athletes at both our schools, and many others, are finding themselves red-flagged this year by a massively overworked NCAA Clearinghouse. Most will eventually get cleared up through appeals from the high schools and universities(Bamba) and some will not. This should be a one-year problem, though. Once all the new classes get finalized in the Clearinghouse database, future recruits should find their approvals much easier. It just would be nice if some posters respond to what another poster actually says; not what they think they said.