UND92,96

So to recap, in the past week we've had prominent former UND letterwinners Tim O'Keefe, Dave Hakstol, Dale Lennon, Bruce Smith, Corey Colehour, Dan Martinson, Dave Williamson and Kelby Klosterman all publicly say the nickname must go for the good of the school and the athletic department. Frank Burggraf is the only former letterwinner I'm aware of on the opposite side. I'm guessing the first group will continue to grow in the coming days and weeks. Will Frank's?

Lennon, several other prominent football alums say nickname must go: http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/229740/

I realize this has all been discussed before fairly extensively, but now with the season nearly over and either a 1-14 or 2-13 road record, I have two questions for bball fans: 1. Realistically, minus Mitchell is the current roster capable of doing much better than this next season? 2. If you answered "no" to #1, what would you do if you were Jones, knowing full well that a .205 road winning percentage may put you on thin ice, and no available scholarships barring some difficult and potentially unpopular decisions?

Jones' road winning percentage is amazingly consistent: .208 (5-19)--first two years (dII) .203 (11-43)--transition years .205 (16-62)--overall It's kind of the college basketball equivalent of the "Mendoza line".

And yet another gem from Frank Burggraf:

I suppose ol' Frank is going to go after Hak next.

It makes even less sense when you factor in that the statute is, in the opinions of PhillySioux, Scott M., myself and probably others on this board, unconstitutional without even getting into the issue of the relative powers of the board of higher ed. and the legislature. Frankly, I hope the Supreme Court's holding is based upon a finding that the statute was an unconstitutional attempt to alter the state's obligations pursuant to the settlement agreement. Let Al find some other excuse to have the battle he so desperately wants.

http://www.grandfork...icle/id/229449/

I would not characterize the quoted section as giving UND a "choice". I believe it's merely describing what would happen if UND breached the Agreement, which of course is what Carlson's statute caused UND to do. Which brings us back to Art. I, Sec. 18 again...

Updated/expanded Herald article: http://www.grandfork...icle/id/229350/

It could, depending on exactly what the Court rules. If a holding that the statute is unconstitutional is based on the legislature overstepping its bounds with regard to board of higher ed. authority, then a constitutional amendment could still be an issue. If Art. I, Sec. 18 is the basis for the holding, I don't see how there's any getting around that. Of course, I realize some will disagree with this.

http://www.grandfork...icle/id/229348/

I just found this: https://www.facebook...Faculty.Advisor

Good question--I am not sure. I agree that Stenehjem needs to step up to the plate here. While I certainly don't condone his previous inaction at the time the statute was first enacted, I'm not necessarily surprised that he didn't want to tick off his political allies. But the game has changed now, as it's not a board of higher ed. vs. legislature battle anymore. He needs to defend the deal he made, or get the hell out of the way and resign.

I'm with you on this. I keep trying to come up with a compelling argument as to how the statute/proposed constitutional amendment could possibly NOT conflict with Art. I, Sec. 18 of the ND Constitution, and I honestly can't think of a good one (granted, it's been nearly 20 years since I took con. law, and it was hardly my best subject ).

57 UND 72 NJIT final UND finishes the season 1-4 on the road in the Great West, after going 4-2 on the road last year.

UND down 52-41 with just under 8 minutes to go.

24 UND 33 NJIT halftime

According to Travis Wilson of WSN, UND has offered Northland Pines RB/ATH Austin Ramesh.

Cause of death has been established: http://www.grandfork...icle/id/229084/

Except that would basically doom the football program, at least until somebody leaves the MVFC.

I'm still trying to understand if people i) still don't believe this is going to happen; or ii) just don't care? I know it was referenced in the Herald article today that some have actually indicated to Faison that they don't care if MN and WI are no longer going to be on the schedule at all, but whether or not that's the prevailing view of the keep-the-nickname-at-all-costs crowd is a mystery to me.

Fullerton is apparently going to be on at about 3:30.

Considering that even without Butler there are still five db's who redshirted this year, it may have been overkill to sign more than two in this class. With that said, I still wouldn't be surprised if a transfer safety is added to bridge the gap until some of the younger players are ready to step in.

Not trying to be critical of any individuals, but considering what last year's freshman class produced, I had hoped to get a little scoring from Antwi and/or Gentry. Whether or not that was realistic is debateable, but that was my hope. Obviously it would have been great if one of the juniors had become a 6 ppg or more scorer, but that isn't likely to happen at this point.