Bison06

So 4-3 if UND beats an FBS which they haven't done, or 3-4 if they don't. So you're telling me that UND could likely have a worse record against NDSU's schedule, but UND fans want to have a discussion about how bad our SOS is? Interesting logic.

So if my act is so incredibly old, please enlighten me as to where in my post I said something false. What do you think UND's record would be against NDSU's schedule?

You mean the best rated conference in FCS? http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc12.htm You need to get your head out of the sand and look at reality. Repeating the Big Sky is the best conference in FCS over and over again doesn't make it true.

What act? Honest question, Do you watch any FCS football outside of the Big Sky?

A zero percent chance that UND only has 2 wins? Now I need to see a game by game analysis because I don't see a guaranteed third win for UND on NDSU's schedule. If you say USD, I would say a win isn't guaranteed against them considering the history in USD vs. UND games. I think against NDSU's schedule, UND still is most likely to be either 3-4 or 4-3. So pretty much the same as they are now. So the discussion of SOS between NDSU and UND is irrelevant because the teams on NDSU's schedule might not be as good as UND's on the whole. But they are still good enough to beat UND.

Your post should be in the dictionary under selective reading. Read the whole sentence.

The question that should be posed is not how NDSU would do against UND's schedule. It's how UND would do against NDSU's schedule. Would UND do better, worse, or the same as NDSU against the same schedule. If you say UND's schedule is tougher, fine, I agree with that. But you lost to most of those teams, so it wouldn't have mattered if you had the SOS of the Minnesota Vikings. SOS is only relevant when you are winning the games when you compare it to someone else's SOS. Like Darell is in this thread. So how about it, how would UND do against NDSU's schedule?

As a general rule, teams that are winning will get the first pick of the litter in recruiting battles. Doesn't mean they get the best players, because recruiting is more art than science, but they get the ones they want which in general means they are better. I understand systems and coaching philosophies play a role in the types of players a team will recruit, but cutting scholarships definitely brings the bad teams up and pulls the good teams back to the pack.

Why is this so hard for you to comprehend? Even with your explanation you are describing a situation that causes a leveling of the playing field. Here is a less complex example. If the FBS decided they would cut scholarships across the board, some guys that would have gone to LSU or Alabama would end up at Minnesota let's say. Would Minnesota have a worse, better, or same chance of beating LSU with players that were in previous years good enough to be on LSU's roster, but due to scholarship cuts ended up at Minnesota. Take the last nine scholarship players off the best teams and they are better than the last nine scholarship teams off of the weaker teams. So you literally take the worst nine scholarship players off of Minnesota's roster and replace them with the worst nine on LSU's roster. Who gets better and who gets worse? Scholarship reductions hurt the best teams the most and at that point in history NDSU was head and shoulders above everyone else.

It's pretty logical to say that was a part of it, but as others have said, football programs are cyclical. Maybe it was just UND's time to shine.

With a simple understanding of arithmetic it really isn't that hard to understand Dave. Someone will have to give specific numbers because I was too young to know what the scholarship limits actually were back then. For the sake of the argument assume that if someone is offered by NDSU they would accept, probably not that far from the truth back then. If everyone has 45 scholarships and they get reduced to 36, there are 9 quality players that in previous years would have been on NDSU's roster that are spread out among the other schools. Also, for the sake of the argument assume that all 9 of those guys that would have gone to NDSU if they had 9 more scholarships end up on the same roster at another school year after year. It would be similar to taking the last 9 guys to be offered a scholarship each year at UND and send them over to SUU or some other conference team. How happy would UND be to do that, especially if you ended up playing against them and they were damn good? College recruiting can be a crapshoot, so even though those 9 might have just missed the cut to get on NDSU's roster they may have turned out to be studs for the other teams. Do this for a few years and it isn't hard to see how this evens the playing field significantly. When I say even the playing field I don't mean in a fair play kind of good way, it evens it in the way that communism evens the playing field, by bringing the best back to the pack. This causes a watering down of the whole division.

I'm sure that's the reason you're angry about it. Nothing to do with it being NDSU I have no doubt.

So given we don't have that information unless he wants to tell us, don't you think it comes off as petty to want your rival school's kids to get in trouble?

You're probably right about that. At least we'd have something else to debate.

Thanks for the lesson on our country's civil court system. I understand how it works. What I don't understand is why someone who has no horse in the race (Goon) would "want" them to be found liable.

What aren't you getting? I have stated many times that if they are liable they should be held to account for it.

Who are you to say that they need added punishment to be certain they learned their lesson. As has been stated in the paper many times, punishments are being handled internally. I don't have children and I don't know if you do either, but when I do, internal family punishments will be much more severe than anything a judge or a police officer could give my son or daughter. If your concern is truly that they are taught to be good young men and take heart in the lesson to be learned, then how can you be certain that hasn't been handled already? In reality, having them learn a lesson isn't your true agenda here. It is to see your rival school stumble and nothing more. I played for Coach Bohl for 3.5 seasons, trust me when I tell you, they have been punished sufficiently to have learned their lesson on this one.

You think it should be a felony? Great, call your representative. For now it isn't so if it's ok with you I'll just defer to the expertise of the judge who sentenced them. Glad our justice system doesn't revolve around what Goon thinks the punishments should be. If they are found liable, I agree, they should be responsible for whatever dollar amount a judge finds them to be. But to want that to happen and ruin their lives? That's a bit much. Haha, so now not only do you want them to be held liable, you are planning to actively seek out these people to push your own selfish agenda. Wow, you're cold dude.

Quote my post where I said the law shouldn't apply to them. It is one thing for someone to say if they are liable than they should be held responsible. I agree with that completely. But for him to say that he flat out wants them to be sued for dollar amounts that are likely more than all of their net worths combined, I find that to be too much and I take issue with that sentiment.

It doesn't surprise me one bit that you hope that. It isn't enough for them to be punished in court, now you hope that they have their financial lives ruined before they begin. Thanks for your concern.

Yeah, nobody has ever said anything in a press conference to appease the masses. I take it you didn't watch the presidential debate last night. College athletics is more than just about winning, but coaches are hired to win football games. If they are also a great guy who kicks out amazing people who go on to great things, that is just a bonus. I do have that expectation of NDSU, all I'm saying is it isn't required. I hold them to a higher standard than their job description might. He may not say it in public, but be honest with yourself. Would Mussman take a few guys with minor offseason trouble and a national championship over a non-playoff year where nobody on the team was even picked up for J-Walking? Seriously think about it. I think we both know the answer. So there is no need to speak to me from your soapbox on this one. Every coach wants the same thing at this level of football. On the bolded part: Where is the public outcry by you then if you hold your athletic department to such a high standard. I would think a man such as yourself who can always be found on the moral high ground would be picketing outside the athletic department offices at UND right now.

No it doesn't, it shows they would like it to carry a more serious penalty moving forward. Using that logic, I'll just start smoking weed now. After all it will likely be de-criminalized sometime in the next few years, that shows it is a less serious crime than some people think, right?

I agree, and under those rules it is my understanding that the coach has final say on a player's punishment. If Bohl doesn't feel they need to punished futher than I am on board with that.

I know he isn't well liked here, but I have spent a lot of time around GT and he is a very decent man.

I keep hearing that, but that is completely irrelevant.