southpaw
-
Posts
3,620 -
Joined
-
Days Won
28
Posts posted by southpaw
-
-
10 minutes ago, Kab said:
We have more in common with Montana, Idaho and NC than we do with Western Illinois, Missouri State and Southern Illinois.
cant say I’m excited to see any of those games
At least going to the big sky games there were some nice cities and stadiums to go to.
We have more in common with NDSU, SDSU and UNI than Sac St, Portland St and Southern Utah.
Can't say I was ever excited to see any of those games.
At least going to MVFC games most fans don't have to drive 1,000 miles.
-
4 minutes ago, nodak651 said:
Doesn't the MVFC usually get a higher percentage of teams into the playoffs, though? Kind of like the NCHC - it's tough, but there is still opportunity.
Exactly. Maybe I didn't articulate well enough. I see the MVFC as the NCHC of FCS. and the Big Sky would be Hockey East. Without NDSU going on this run, I'd bet at least two other teams have titles in the past handful of years. There have been some damn good teams from the MVFC.
There have also been some good Big Sky teams but (and this is as a fan of the Big Sky for UND) I just never felt like any of the teams were quite the complete team. I'd take some of those SDSU teams over any of the Big Sky teams any day of the week and twice on Saturdays in January.
I loved the Big Sky. I went to more away games there than I will ever in the MVFC, and I'm a bit scared about how UND will fare against the MVFC.
-
25 minutes ago, siouxfan512 said:
I mean they have some really good teams, but so did the Big Sky, especially the last few seasons.
NDSU is a different animal, so throw them out of the conversation. SDSU, Youngstown, UNI .... all comparable talent wise to teams in the BSC. Different style of course.
Seems that the MVFC team just tend to beat up on each other though. So apart from NDSU, and sometime SDSU, nobody really runs away with it. You have a bunch of teams that have a few good wins and a few good losses.
That being said, when I look at next year, it could be fun. It is just tough to know how UND will do on the road at some places they have never played. Obviously road play needs to improve, as we saw from the Nicholls game.
SDSU is the toughest home game, but that doesn't mean UND shouldn't be able to compete or win. USD at home is always interesting. Should win all other home games. No clue how to feel about Illinois St or Youngstown state. I just don't know enough about these MVFC teams yet.
When I think of the MVFC, UND is nearly guaranteed to play 4 of the top 5 teams every year. Yes, there are definitely bottom-tier teams that should be easy wins for any "adequate" team.
In the Big Sky, you could get super lucky with scheduling and find yourself playing the six lowest teams in a season with just a couple of higher level teams. The uneven scheduling is more magnified in a bigger conference, so the strength of the conference gets spread around. I think the top of the Big Sky is on par with the top of the MFVC. But more than half your schedule can be low-level teams that you should dominate. Unless they're ISU, in which case ????
-
Get a point tonight, rest everyone tomorrow. Bring in the emergency goalie.
Stay healthy for the first round.
-
1
-
-
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, Sioux94 said:
5. Player Safety – Defensive linemen (within one yard of the L.O.S.), on scrimmage kick plays, must be aligned completely outside the frame of the snapper.So 4th and inches....sounds like QB sneak following the center is a no brainer.
It's only on kick plays.
-
19 minutes ago, FlinFlan80 said:
We do not hold our head coach to a lower standard than someone in the business world. The world of college football requires you to work 1-2 years for free in most cases. Did you do that for your high stress job? Coaching college football is a stressful job for, usually a terrible salary. Yep. Bubba gets PAID. However, he has worked to get there, just like most in college football and it takes time to get to any Head Coaching position. Your misunderstanding of people's work ethic, livelihood, and well-being is concerning. I know that's part of the job is taking criticism from people who have never been in the industry and never will, but come on man. No one is sitting there saying "You know you are above average, but we want better."
Yes, I did four semesters of 30+ hours a wekk of free work to start my career. Followed by a very stressful, even lower-paying job than a football coach.
At no point have I questioned anyone's work ethic, livelihood or well-being. I have questioned whether the average level of success achieved by the football team is deserving of an extension for the head coach.
While technically a 37-32 record is above average, I don't believe it is adequate as you called it. Zero playoff wins in six seasons is not adequate. I know Bubba will get us to the playoffs 3 out of 5 seasons, but I want better. And I think the UND football team, fans and alumni should to.
-
1
-
2
-
-
33 minutes ago, FlinFlan80 said:
So you let someone go who is doing an adequate job because there is someone out there who might do better? Man I don't know what you do, but if you get canned tomorrow and you boss says "We like what you do, but we just feel there is something better out there". I hope you take it with humility, because that's what your asking Chaves to do. To bring it all in remember, the coordinators and assistants do 99% of the work and that's at any program. The HC is simply a personality and for North Dakota Bubba fits that.
I work in a career field that is incredibly competitive. I have 90-day Objectives and Key Results that I, and all of my colleagues, need to hit every quarter over and over. Yes, there is room for a bad quarter here and there. But there also are never two quarters in a row where my OKRs are at the same level.
In my job, I must continuously improve and provide value to our company and consumers. If I'm not hitting those targets, I'm out of a job.
Why is it too much to expect the same of a head coach? Chaves likely has set season OKRs for him. An injury riddled season is understandable, it's out of his hands. But he needs to be improving and reaching bigger targets. Just making the playoffs every year isn't progressing. Losing to ISU every year isn't showing improvement year over year.
Why do we hold our head football coach to a lower standard than someone working in the business world? Just because he is a nice guy and came from UND?
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, FlinFlan80 said:
I hope all of you are perfect at your job and work miracles daily. This was a once great program. 20 years ago. Bubba and he staff have shown that the are making positive steps to improve the program with what they are working with. Honestly, FCS wise its probably one of the hardest schools to get decent playmakers to when they could just go 60 miles south and win national championships. Also, the program currently doesn't have locker rooms. What I am getting at is, I love he passion on here for UND football, but let's be real this is not a destination spot for coaches. Right now, Bubba is the best we can do and keeping him means keeping his staff, which if you go to any games, practices, or coaching clinics you know Bubba has done a solid job assembling his coaching staff, which is one of the most important jobs of a Head Coach. I get it everyone on here is sick of average. Well they've been to the playoffs 2 of the last 3 years and without a slew of injuries it would have been 3 of 3. I know I'll get some smart remarks about this post, but we need to be realists. UND football is making improvements. Not as drastic as most would like, but they are noticeable.
Remember when we had a future FBS head coach apply for the job and they lost out to Bubba?
No, UND isn't getting a current FBS coach to head to GF, but to say UND should be happy with Bubba because it's not a destination school is crap. Get a coach on the rise instead of collecting a series of seasons just good enough to make the playoffs and then lose.
-
As some have mentioned, I'm going to wait until the details come out before I praise or am super internet angry about the contract extension.
There's so many scenarios that could play out. I'm just hoping there's wording in there where he can seamlessly be transitioned to a fundraising position at any point following this coming season. I'd think giving Danny two more years at OC would be beneficial but for once I think we have an internal candidate who legitimately should be our next head coach.
-
3
-
-
4 hours ago, burd said:
It wouldn't matter if they were playing the Wuhan Warriors; it's a hoax.
Tell that to the Swiss Hockey League where they'll play the playoffs in empty arenas, or the city of Venice which is a ghost town, or literally anyone here in a town with at least one infected person.
Only in the US could a deadly virus be considered a hoax...
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, SiouxVolley said:
It's a matter of basic business courtesy, which you apparently know nothing about.
New venues also have broadcasting issues and the call isn't for choosing games.
Oh, so now that must make phone call is just a courtesy? You made it sound like an absolute necessity. Perhaps only broadcasting 8 effing games from venues doesn't require a phone call.
CBSSN has broadcasted games from Air Force where the game cam is in the middle of the press box with the front legs on a table, tight cam is on a mobile platform, and the announcers are calling the game from a folding table directly behind the top row of fans.
There are no fiber or triax runs and your entire production truck needs to be searched before being allowed on campus.
It's literally the worst place in college hockey to broadcast a game and yet they still do it.
Of course CBS would prefer to do games from the Ralph but don't act like venues are an issue.
Of all the times you've made an ass of yourself with horrible predictions that are insanely wrong, you're well out of your league on this one.
-
10 minutes ago, SiouxVolley said:
Every conference speed dials their national broadcaster before they make a move unless the conference is run by idiots .
There is the confirmation that you know nothing about college hockey and broadcast contracts.
CBS is broadcasting 8 of 192 conference games. Plus 3 more tournament games and none of the entire first round.
-
34 minutes ago, SiouxVolley said:
Mankato has to become popular in the entire MSP or even the Rochester metro. It doesn't have a metro region like CC has now, and CC is downsizing it's arena. Michigan Tech has a Jamestown size metro. CBS Sports looks at Mankato and Mich Tech and says no, not interested. Bowling Green faces the same issue. CBS would be give UST and ASU a resounding yes.
Attendance does not reflect the the interest if it's a big metro or large area (UND). Something called ratings that trumps attendance.
What does CBS have to do with what schools are accepted to the NCHC? You clearly don't understand how games are picked for broadcast on CBS.
And are you really insinuating that Mankato winning a championship is going to drive up significant interest in viewers in the twin cities would be a tipping point for the nchc accepting Mankato? Hint: The NCHC isn't bringing in money from CBS broadcasts. And it certainly isn't concerned about an extra couple of thousand people watching the 1-2 games that would feature Mankato each year if they were accepted.
-
17 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:
What folks are missing here:
None of us are missing that. We're all in agreement that the NCHC is a destination conference and that you have to be special to get in. Where we disagree is what needs to be special to get in.
Some believe attracting fans after having a successful year is what matters. Other feel that a long-term financial commitment to hockey is more important.
I'd rather have CC with its sporadic success but financial resources. Others prefer a school like Mankato that is growing but somehow needs to rely on an additional 300 people per game to be considered.
-
17 hours ago, SiouxVolley said:
N Dame refused to be an actual partner and the NCHC was not high faluting enough for them, as they took their own deal with bigger name name schools like BC, UConn, Providence and the Hockey East with a separate NBC Sports deal. The NCHC was just too low of a conference in name to be associated with and besmirch their precious name just for hockey. But then walked away for similar deal the Big Ten and NBC Sports, which most had never assumed they would do as ND and the BIG are mortal enemies.
Some people actually do know what they're talking about on this board. Fortunately, Brad Schlossman's extensive set of articles about the formation of the NCHC shows you're once again wrong:
Quote“We made this real commitment early on that the strength of any possible future conference would only and solely be determined by the unity of its membership,” Alberts said. “We saw the impact on college football based on one program demanding to be treated differently than others. It pulls a conference apart at the seams. We made a commitment to four or five core principles and we were determined not to deviate.”
Notre Dame wanted to control the league’s television deal, and NCHC members stayed committed to not letting them do that.
The NCHC set a deadline for Notre Dame to decide in the early fall. The Fighting Irish called and asked for an extension, but the NCHC said no.
-
49 minutes ago, SiouxVolley said:
Championships build fan bases. It's rather simple. Mankato isn't that popular now but if it won, it's economic viability vastly increases. Another stupid comment by a self professed expert.
Michigan Tech renovated their arena and has won three championships, but Upper Michigan simply doesn't have enough people. Tech's graduates mostly live in Lower Michigan and rarely congregate except in Detroit for hockey
Tech has a proven hockey commitment which you deny, so throw your opinions out as they are garbage.
That's the type of instability the NCHC wants to avoid. It shouldn't take a championship for a program to become financially viable. Look at Providence... they're 5 years removed from a championship, have recently won in a top conference, and have shrinking attendance. If a school is relying on fans to show up after a championship, then it's not financially stable. Every program is going to have ups and downs, but if a program goes without any sort of success for a dozen years, they should still be improving their financial commitment.
Michigan Tech hasn't won a championship since 1975, so I don't see how those are relevant. Yes, Tech has played hockey for a long time and their program is not going to fold anytime soon. That's completely different from showing a financial commitment to hockey.
Coaches salaries are a good indicator. From the data i found, not a single coach in the WCHA can make more than $300,000 including incentives. And now the NCHC base salaries:
Berry $400,000
Sandelin $400,000
Murray $230,000 plus $110,000 in appearance/media fees
Bergeron $305,000
Gabinet $250,000
As a private school, CC and DU aren't listed, but CC is building a new on-campus arena despite a huge lack of success in the NCHC. That's a financial commitment to hockey that is what separates the schools the NCHC wants to include from ones who do just enough to keep their program around.
-
6 hours ago, SiouxVolley said:
My point was that the NCHC didn’t form on basic hockey principles and history, but on economic and academic viability. If hockey history and passion were so important,, where is Michigan Tech? Michigan Tech has rigorous academics, and a major endowment, but doesn’t have a viable media base.
Notre Dame even gets a special deal from the P5, and they are not going to be equal to a bunch of hockey schools.
You literally posted that Mankato likely needs to win a championship to get into the NCHC. What does that have to do with the economic and academic viability you are now touting.
The NCHC was formed once the writing was on the wall that the B1G teams were leaving the WCHA. That meant there were a significant number of schools still in the conference who didn't have a history of prioritizing hockey: the Alaskas, Bemidji, Mankato, Tech, and SCSU.
The other 5 started discussions with Miami, Western, and Notre Dame. The Irish had their NBCSN deal which the nchc coveted but not if it wasn't going to be an even split. After months of discussions, the NCHC schools said no to Notre Dame's demands one last time.
That left 7 schools and they needed an 8th. Looking at the options at the time, you realistically only had SCSU and maybe Ferris St and BG. St Cloud had already shown more financial commitment to hockey compared to the other two so they were added.
None of it had to do with winning or media market like you say are why St Thomas and ASU will be added. The future of the NCHC is with schools in the region who improve the commitment to hockey.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, nodak651 said:
I think part of the issue was that it would be pretty much all Notre Dame games though, right? Not really a true league-wide contract like we have with CBS.
Bingo. But what would I know about the NCHC, I'm just naive about what happened with Notre Dame.
-
9 hours ago, SiouxVolley said:
I would bet CC and DU would block MSU_M and Bemidji. They are totally on board with ASU and St Thomas because of academics and media market.
The NCHC didn't form because of academics and media market and that's not going to drive the addition of new members. If it had, Notre Dame would have been a founding member of the NCHC. Instead, the new conference walked away from the Irish. New members will only be added if they've demonstrated both a significant commitment of athletic department personnel for hockey AND a significant commitment of financial resources. On ice success obviously is helpful, but to think Mankato needing to win a championship plays any role in their acceptance to the NCHC is naive.
Mankato's best chance for joining the NCHC is ASU finishing their arena. A Bemidji/Mankato for WMU/Miami trade is a net loser for the NCHC because of the money each school contributes to the conference. While the conference is now self-supporting, there are still amounts that need to be paid per school each year.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, hky said:
Poolman, Peski and ?
Like I said in early 2016, if UND wins a national championship, everyone can leave. They've earned it and I wouldn't feel bad if a player decided to go after a natty.
-
1 minute ago, nodakgirl93 said:
So with most teams leaving the WCHA what happens with the MacNaughton?
Michigan Tech owns the MacNaughton, so it goes with them.
-
On 9/10/2019 at 8:01 PM, SiouxVolley said:
Just knew this post would get rejections from posters.
The intimate seating with a track around the fb field? How does that make intimate?
Rented bleachers can get set up along three sides, so the cost goes to expenses, not capital. It says they will get temporary seating “at least” on occasion.
Once the significance of the move sets in, another permanent expansion can be done.
If EWU was going to stay FCS, the cheapest thing to do is nothing as FCS has no payout. EWU wants a piece of the CFP, bigger opponent payouts and vastly expanded media attention that comes with FBS.
Just wait until the faculty find out EWU is adding thousands of seats and millions of dollars in expenses: https://www.inlander.com/spokane/ewu-faculty-write-report-suggesting-cuts-to-athletics-budget-or-even-eliminating-it-entirely/Content?oid=19099082
-
2020 Dumpster Fire (Enter at your own risk)
in Community
Posted
While I personally am more worried about other deadly situations despite the fact that so far four people in my office building have tested positive, I understand that city and hospital officials are more concerned.
There is no vaccine, it spreads as fast as, if not faster, than the flu, the known death rate is higher than the flu, and hospitals can't handle a massive number of cases regardless of the illness.
There's a reason events here in Europe are being canceled: the hospitals are full. I can understand why cities could be asking for these events to be canceled. If 1% of a regional gets sick, you're looking at maybe 80 people. If 1% of Detroit gets sick, there's a major problem.