Gothmog

You really don't see that what you're saying doesn't make any sense? The bottom line is that if UND had moved with NDSU when NDSU asked (and they clearly should have), NDSU would have gained no advantage over UND by moving up ... thus defeating the supposed purpose of their moving in the first place. Political pressure notwithstanding, NDSU officials asking UND to move up with them makes no sense if their real intent was to escape competition with UND.

That's just ridiculous! NDSU asked UND (and the whole NCC) to move up with them....even waited an extra year to give them time. Why would they do that if their purpose was to gain an advantage on UND? NDSU moved up because DI was where it belonged. It's pretty hard to argue that NDSU was wrong.

If there's really zero chance that either team will ever back out -- presumably because the game is too important to both schools -- why did the annual game end in the first place? Obviously, it must not have been that important to someone.

That's a poor argument. For a number of reasons, including the number of games in a season and per game attendence, a single football game is more important than a single event in any of NDSU's other sports. The cancellation of a single basketball game, for instance, is less likely to happen and less damaging if it does happen than the cancellation of a football game. Also, as people on the board are fond of pointing out, football is a simply a more important sport at NDSU than any other sport. That's why NDSU isn't as concerned about scheduling an "unreliable partner" in sports other than football...the potential for damage is much lower.

Oh c'mon, you must recognize how much more important football is, at least to NDSU.

Dude, don't be ridiculous. You can't possibly schedule and play a football game without cooperating and working together. Again, your attitude is the problem.

In your opinion... I already provided examples. You seem unwilling or unable to see them (see UND's behavior circa 2002).

No, they did not. NDSU had a contract with the conference not the individual schools. Once it left the conference, it had no obligation to any NCC members. In fact, NDSU needed games, we would have been happy to continue scheduling some of our former conference mates.

Yes, that's it. Until you show me some evidence that the culture in GF has changed I'll assume that it has not.

No, but by giving verbal assurances that it would sign a contract, sitting on the contract for months, and then blindsiding NDSU by calling a press conference to announce that they would never schedule NDSU again, and generally acting like complete jerks, UND proved that it could not be counted on as a reliable business partner.

Well, I not going to teach a course in reading comprehension. But nowhere in either of those posts does it say that UND ever backed out of a contract.

Again, UND had every right to schedule, or not schedule. NDSU 10 years ago. It's the manner that they chose to announce and to implement that decision that is/was the problem. I don't expect them to ever own up to it. But, UND officials behaved very, very badly.

Not sure where you're going with this. If you mean they're not "partners" in the legal business entity sense, I suppose you're right. But I would have thought that it was obvious I wasn't using the word in that sense. If you mean they are not partners in the sense of two parties cooperating to advance their shared interests, you're dead wrong. Once again your perception that a sports rivalrymust me marked by hatred and cut-throat competition is symptomatic of the problem.

Call me out all you want. I never said they backed out of a contract, why should I provide examples of something I never claimed?

I never said MSU burned NDSU in any way. I did say that UND burned NDSU back in 2002. But even that had nothing to do with their not honoring a contract.

Huh? I haven't heard one person complain that MSU broke the contract, or did anything that they weren't entitled to do. We wanted to play the game, so we're pissed at them. You would be too.

Like it or not, they would be business partners, should they decide to resume the on field rivalry. Also, the attitude revealed by your post is further evidence of why the rivalry should not be resumed. UND and NDSU are not, and should not be, enemies. The sort of hatred you seem to think is necessary and normal is counter-productive to both the schools and to the state. You'll know when it's time to resume the rivalry when you see that attitude starting to fade.

That's kinda the same thing I was saying. Biased towards UND, of course. I don't agree that anyone expected UND to "fall on it's sword", but you're essentially right. The manner of UND's rejection of the 4 game contract back in 2002 is the reason that NDSU doesn't want the game now. And that is absolutely tied into NDSU's preception of UND as an unreliable business partner.

What did my post have to do with MSU?

Like it or not. That's why NDSU doesn't want the game.

Who's feeling abandoned? I hear a lot more UND people whinning about playing NDSU than the other way around.

It has nothing to do with being hurt. If you get burned in a business deal, you think twice before you do business with that company again. That's what's going on here, NDSU just can't trust UND. It will take a while for that to come back.

Who said the contract would be good for UND? I think both schools would be better off without the football rivalry.

Be leery then. That's fine with me.

You're grasping at straws precisely because it is a baseball game. In any case, it's not the fact that UND didn't sign the contract back in 2002 that's the problem. They had every right to schedule or not schedule NDSU. It's the way that they did it that caused the problem. The relationship between the schools was changed forever, and not for the better.