Yote 53

Let's just say that as a Coyote who battled the Sioux on the gridiron for many years and witnessed the battles for many more years after my playing days were done, Fighting Hawks is a less than underwhelming nickname. Just an outsiders perspective.

As an outsider looking in this process has been totally jacked up. In the end I would think you all want a nickname you can accept and rally behind. IMO, either Nodaks or Roughriders work best for UND. In time the majority of people will come to accept either one because they are both unique and the people of North Dakota can come to identify with them and proudly call themselves a Rider or a Nodak. Fighting Hawks? What a complete joke. Go through all of this to come up with the most non-descript, generic bird. This is a nickname for a major university, not a U8 girls soccer team. You might as well just saved yourself some grief and called yourself the color Green. How is anybody going to identify with Fighting Hawks?

University of Iowa is inching closer. I don't think this Coralville Arena project has the traction it does unless there is an unpublicized understanding with the Iowa AD on adding varsity hockey at Iowa. http://www.sbncollegehockey.com/big-ten/2015/8/15/9159669/iowa-hockey-coralville-arena

Sioux City Explorers minor league baseball team shortens the name to X's.

God I can't stand watching those goobers from Nebraska in the stands. Banging on the glass like fools. Have they ever seen a puck? How do you guys let these people in your conference?

I am reading through this thread that once ASU announced we are seeing more schools openly talk about adding hockey programs (just read articles about Arizona and Buffalo). I really think that ASU going D1 is the big break that will lead to alot more schools starting hockey programs. That's a good thing for college hockey and it's a good thing for hockey in the U.S. in general. Like I posted earlier, UND is like royalty in college hockey, occupying the upper crust of the sport with schools like BC and Minny. College hockey expansion will not hurt UND in any way, in fact it will only serve as a way to expand the schools profile and presence across more of the country. I wish USD would get into the D1 hockey game. College hockey is a great sport.

UND hockey will be fine for all the reasons you just stated. A blue blood of college hockey if there ever was one.

This is the first domino. It's all about programming for the conference TV networks. BIG schools will be next to add more teams with Nebraska being the first one and Illinois, Northwestern, and Iowa being the next candidates. I wouldn't worrry about it diluting the product. There are a lot of hockey players out there. Frankly, there is more talent than opportunities. If anything major NCAA college hockey expansion is going to hurt the CHL teams.

I can see where many of you are thinking this AAA Midget team would be good for UND Hockey and recruiting. As a parent of a kid playing association hockey (Sioux City, IA) and coaching in the association the thought of AAA hockey in the Upper Midwest makes me cringe. I watch shows like "Making of a Royal" on the NHL Network and it makes me sick. Parents shelling out $15,000 a year, jetting all over the country, and having to send their kids off to live with another family is no way to grow the sport. I hear of the stories going on down in Missouri (AAA hockey territory) since we go down to the KC area for tournaments, the next weekend we go up to Minnesota for a tournament and the hockey is much better and the tournaments are run much better. Truth is Minnesota, Wisconsin, N & S Dakota, and Iowa have it right with association based hockey. Keep the costs down, grow the #'s in the sport, and develop the kids. More kids playing means more chances to get talented kids which in turn means more talent available for UND to recruit. Going the AAA route will keep parents from ever enrolling and getting their kids playing hockey to begin with if they know what path they are starting down. We need to make hockey more like area basketball and football programs, not go in the opposite direction where only those with well heeled parents can play. Between the number of games in association hockey throughout the winter season and with spring and summer hockey becoming so popular players have plenty of ice time and opportunity to develop. Besides, I don't see why you guys are worried. UND is a big dog in college hockey, they are going to get their share of top end talent with or without this AAA Midget team.

Nice to see this series wil resume, now just need to make it permanent and everything will be perfect.

I hope you don't think Terry V is the spokesman for all South Dakota. He is an SDSU hack and one of the reasons many USD people won't buy the Argus Leader, that and the Argus's totally biased coverage for SDSU over USD. We all get a chuckle down here when reading about NDSU fans thinking they have a shot in the Valley. The Valley is a basketball conference and they want winning basketball programs. Give us a few years and South Dakota is going to take over and dominate the Summit like we dominated the NCC in basketball the last 2 decades. NDSU has football history but USD has the basketball history. Truth is, the only way any Dakota schools get in the Valley is if there is a schism in that conference between the private and public schools. Then I could see a conference of the Dakotas, Missouri St, Indiana & Illinois St, SIU, UNI, and Wichita St forming. More likely, and probably a great idea already mentioned is for the Dakota 4 to band with the Montanas and build an awesome new western conference.

Agreed x 2.

I wouldn't say it was bush league, I'd say it was prudent and looking out for the best interest of the school. You know, the whole mess could have been avoided if the BSC would have just waited and made sure all 3 schools announced together. USD had to go to its BOR to get approval. Two more days is all it took. If UND and SUU were told they had to wait to announce for two more days then there would have never been that crack made to allow the MVFC to make the play they did.

Teasing the Big Sky...we were set and ready to join until the MVFC came in at the very last second and offered us a spot. Even then many inside the AD still wanted to go to the BSC. Given what transpired and other influences USD had no choice but to stay in the Summit and join the MVFC. Too bad the UND admins can't see that for what it was. So now they don't want to schedule USD out of spite? Fine, we're set in our conferences, have rekindled long time rivalries with SDSU and NDSU, and will have no trouble finding games. Too bad though, another rivalry destroyed because adults want to act like children. Didn't somebody in the administration there learn anything after what has gone on with NDSU?

You can't tell them anything over there on B-ville. They've got a whole thread on how USD is following their coattails. Posting there is like beating your head against the wall. Jeopardy question, the answer is: Central Florida, Air Force, Wisconsin, & Northwestern Answer: ?

When did Central Michigan and Ball State become part of the Big Ten or Big 12? If USD was following the NDSU model then wouldn't we be lining up MAC schools? Our AD has been pretty clear about our model going forward, a MVFC schedule and one midwest based FBS game, what he does with the two other games is of the most concern to me. I would like to see one home and one road FCS game each season with one of those games being UND every year. No D2's or NAIA's, please.

"Please" is the appropriate response. UND embarassed themselves. You need to own that on your own and not attempt to spread that around to the rest of us.

Maybe there was a scheduling conflict. Who knows? I'd like tot hink we could play each other in one of the first 3 weekends of the season.

I guess I just figured UND didn't want to lock in anything with USD because they were pursuing the NDSU series. Totally understandable. What is not understandable is in 2012 when the Sioux play South Dakota Tech (School of Mines) yet leave USD off the schedule. I mean seriously? That makes no sense. Keep in mind this is just what I heard on my end here and when I hear stuff it tends to be pretty accurate, if you know my track record on posting things. I'd like to hear the UND perspective if anyone can get that info. I think it is reasonable if the AD's just come out and make a statement as to why it won't happen (pursuing XYZ series, need home games, etc) instead of leaving us all hanging. From what I hear it's a no-brainer on our end and we're willing to continue the series.

Ok, I can give an outside observer's perspective on the squabble you got going here. Since USD has a long history with both schools and also played both schools just last year I think I can give you a reasonable answer. Based on last year's play NDSU had the better team in 2010. As for the question who has the superior program the answer is neither one of you do. You both have strong programs with good tradition that most years put very good teams on the field. Who benefits most from this game? Since UND joined the BSC, neither one of you gets more of a benefit or needs this game any more than the other. UND will be playoff eligible and be a member of a strong FCS conference, same as NDSU. Playing this game annually now should be done for the benefit of the people of North Dakota and because it is a good regional non conference game that will sell out, create excitement and fan interest and is not a travel hassle for fans to get to. If NDSU doesn't want to play UND, I'm sure USD would gladly play the Sioux every year (I've got more on that subject, why does your AD keep blocking the UND/USD series? From what I've heard we've offered several different proposals to keep us playing each other and UND keeps shooting them down). As for the excuse of needing wins over patsy FCS teams to be playoff eligible, you answered your own question. If a loss to UND or vice versa to NDSU is the deciding factor in keeping you out of the playoffs then you didn't deserve to be there in the first place. As for the trailblazer, who went first argument, who cares? So USD/UND went 5 years later, in the end we (USD) ended up in the exact same conference as the SU's and UND ended up in the Big Sky. Heck, you could actually make the argument that the U's took the better approach in waiting to see how this thing would all play out since UND ended up in the conference NDSU and SDSU coveted and USD had their pick of which conference they wanted. In the end we all ended up in the FCS, in quality conferences, and very soon all playoff eligible so it really doesn't matter anymore except to a bunch of internet chest thumpers.

USD already has 75% of the money pledged for its projects (word on the street), all private money. The issue is the BOR cutting funding for higher ed and then approving the building of athletic projects. Doesn't look good to do that in the same meeting to John Q Public. Expect us to get our approval at the next meeting and breaking ground by 2013 on the arena. You are correct in that SDSU's project is much larger in scale, the price tag is $100 million and probably rising with time, whereas USD's is more like $45-50 million. I don't know what their money situation is, whether money has been pledged, or what. I think the difference between the schools is that SDSU wants permission to start planning and fundraising for this long term project (its a 2025 master plan) whereas people expect USD to have our's done inside of a couple years.

We "bought" Eastern Washington this season. We were supposed to get a return home game from Lamar this season but they backed out on us. They got to chip off a $100,000 check for their refusal to play from what I heard. I am not complaining about having to schedule non-D1's in transition. Everyone has to realize the when NDSU and SDSU transitioned there were more FCS teams available for scheduling and the costs of "buying" games has shot up. That said, I don't see anyone here or at USD really complaining about non-D1's now, it's something we've come to accept with transition. It'd be nice to see an all D1 schedule but I know it's not always feasible, it's the non-D1 games on schedule in future years after we've both secured conference affiliation and are playoff eligible that people complain about. It does no good to play a non-D1 when you are playoff eligible. FWIW, I thought the NAIA NW Oklahoma St team we brought in last year (and this year to replace Lamar) was easily better than FCS Drake and better than UNC. I think you would agree that USF was better than other "higher level" teams you've seen at the Al. That still doesn't "move the needle" as perception is those teams are inferior.

I honestly don't know if it was USD that put the kabosh on this or if it was UND. I do know that we have on FCS home game already, can't imagine we would need another one. I'll ask around.

Non-conference in 2012 USD plays: 09/08/12 Colgate 09/22/12 @Northwestern That leaves 09/01/12 and 09/15/12 as the probable open dates. I would guess the MVFC schedule starts up on 09/29/12. Who does UND have scheduled on either 09/01 or 09/15? Keep in mind USD comes to UND in 2011 so I would guess the game would need to be in Verm in 2012. Although, I seem to remember UND coming to Verm in back-to-back years when we transitioned from the NCC schedule to the GWFC schedule. So it would not be out of the question for USD to come to GF in back-to-back years in the interests of preserving this historic rivalry.

As a fan would you be happy with 5 home games a year? Year A: 8 BSC (4 home/4 away), USD (home), away at FCS (part of home and home), FBS (away) Year B: 8 BSC (4 home/4 away), USD (away), FCS (home), FBS (away) Repeat Cycle The USD game, FBS game, and home/home FCS game would need to take place the first 3 weeks of the season then move into the conference schedule. The reality is that if you want an FBS game it is going to be on the road and if you want an FBS game and 6 home games then that sixth home game is going to be against subpar competition. I would be happy to forego the sixth game and go with the above arrangement for USD (8 MVFC games, UND, FCS, FBS) if that means we get to keep the Sioux on the schedule.