Herd
-
Posts
955 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by Herd
-
-
With all the hard work and dedication culminating in this week's press conference and celebration of und's all-new, all-sport "Conference", und makes a bid for #1 in ND. Does that put und in the lead, or do we have to wait 10 years for the conference to be recognized by the ncaa?
-
So UND is done hunting, right? There is no way we will ever find a 5x5, we're stuck with this 4x4 forever.
That is what I don't understand about NDSU fans. NDSU found a conference within 5 years but there is no way in hell that UND is going to find one, they're screwed. Like its a race to NDSU or something. I am fairly confident these two schools are going to be around for a long long time to come.
I'd sure the hell hope their not done, but the recent press conference and celebration sure makes it look like they are fat and happy on deer meat. Any reader of the Herald would assume that und has majically grabbed the brass ring. This is the right thing for UND, but Articles calling this a full scale conference are disingenuous at best.
-
This whole thing reminds me of deer hunting in ND and MN. When a ND hunter shoots a deer wth 4 antler points on each side, he has shot a "4 point buck". When a MN hunter shoots that same deer, he calls it an "8 point buck", but it sure sounds a lot bigger than that 4 point buck in ND.
Well und, you've got your 8 point buck, time to call a press conference and celebrate! It sure looks a lot bigger than the same 4 point buck that ndsu had during its transition. We called our 4 point buck "an Alliance", and kept hunting for a 5x5.
-
Regardless of the ability of their football team, Valpo is a DI school while UWLax is a DIII school. In 2004 Valpo's NCAA basketball success solidified their reputation as a DI school. It did not take a marketing genius to fill the Fargodome for a game against Valpo, even though everyone knows they are non-scholly, and I was not dumb enough to think it would be a close game.
For marketing purposes, ND would be wise to bring in non-scholly DI's vs. DIII's if possible. Usually the DI non's are looking for a high profile game to possibly get a shot at the FCS playoffs if they can run the undeafeated table ala San Diego the last few years. Bringing in the Butlers, Daytons, and Drakes would be a good move compared to DIII's, regardless of which is the better team.
Valpo was NDSU's first DI football game. The skill of their team did not change that fact. Nice move by the AD, and a nice full house. I don't think I would have made the 5 hour drive for a DIII.
-
You echo my point. Chapman will do what is best for Chapman. This is not a negative, just an observation of reality. Likewise, I would expect the President of UND to do what is best for him. I would expect if he is to do his job properly, Chapman should be outspoken for NDSU but he also appears to be a loose cannon in the ND university system. Why he should support UND as MplsBison suggests doesn't make sense unless there is something in it for him. Your response suggests that you agree with MplsBison's position.
I'm actually an alumni of the University of Maryland for my undergrad and graduate degrees.
How is Chapman supposed to cooperate with und the past 5 years when all und wanted to do was stay DII? If all ndsu did was to cooperative with und, Chapman would have just said "OK, we'll just stay DII with you in the NCC". What a stupid move that would have been. Why are you questioning Chapman's leadership or motives, when the lack of vision at und is clearly the issue.
-
The UND fans on this board know exactly what's going on regarding this development. I've not seen anyone over excited about this news. We recognize this for what it is, a (hopefully) short-term glorified scheduling alliance. I agree that the writer should have put the story into proper context by stating the time and membership requirements for a new conference to get an automatic bid in the various sports. Perhaps you should email your frustration to the writer of the story. Or better yet, email the Forum and tell them to write an article about how insignificant this conference will be.
Yes, I would agree that true und fans understand. But average readers of the Herald will assume that this is an actual DI conference recognized with full DI conference priviledges, when the truth is that this is a scheduling alliance, and teams will be jumping the Great West ship at the first opportunity to join a "Conference" not a "Scheduling Alliance", that will allow opportunities for DI post season. The tone of this article is very deceptive IMO.
-
1990 was part of NDSU's streak of dominance over UND (12 consecutive wins from 1981 through 1992). I ignored 1990 for the same reason I ignored 1991 and 1992, UND didn't start their streak of dominance over NDSU until 1993.
As I indicated before, the scholarship reductions brought NDSU back to the pack, and were the trigger for later 90's mediocrity. When the current day NDSU program has the ability to strech with the higher scholarship level, they will again show dominance. The 90's decline was very predictable, and will be similar to what happens in the future to MN St. in the Northern Sun, when they are forced to play down to lower scholarship levels.
-
While not ideal, this is probably a necessary short term step with a view to the long term. As mksioux said, I would hope that UND wouldn't lock into a long term commitment to such a wide spread conference.
It is almost deceptive journalism calling this a conference when the it would not be recognized as a conference by the ncaa for 10 years, and 13 years for basketball (unless exceptions were granted). It is an alliance at best, but a good scheduling alliance beats having no affiliation. Where is this outlined in the article? The uneducated reader is probably thinking that having a conference with ncaa autobids is the greatest thing ever.
-
If you think 2003 was one of NDSU's worst years then perhaps you're the one who has not "put much thought into things". I believe the year you're thinking of was 2002, which I was not referring to. I was actually dismissing that horrible year because, as fun as it was for me, it was a blip on the radar. I'm talking about the competitive years NDSU had in D2 prior to their move up to I-AA. Aside from that one bad year that you (not I) made reference to, the Bison were a good (not great) D2 football program in the decade prior to moving up. UND, on the other hand, has been a great D2 football program in the decade prior to moving up. Basic logic and common sense should lead any sane and reasonable person to come to the conclusion that the odds are in favor of a great D2 being likely to do anything that a good D2 was able to do. I understand that flies in the face of your stream yellow propaganda hype machine, but sometimes the truth hurts. Deal with it. Of course there's no guarantee that anybody will accomplish anything after moving up, but just by playing the percentages an intelligent individual would predict that a team with greater success prior to moving up would be more likely to have greater success after the move up. To suggest that UND will not be able to compete with NDSU in terms of recruiting at the I-AA level sounds like some wishful thinking to me.
Northern Colorado had more late 90's success in DII than UND (championships/wins), had almost immediate entry into the Big Sky, and look where that got them. I guess the percentages game that you are playing has it pitfalls, doesn't it. Projecting a conference-less und to the top 5 FCS level sounds like wishful thinking to me.
The situation that will affect MN St. in the Northern Sun is the same thing that happenend to NDSU in DII. Scholarship reductions stifled our ability to recruit to our capability and dominate, bringing us back to the pack and to mediocrity. Does anyone in the Northern Sun have the resources to hang with MN St., NO, but once scholarship levels are equal and MN St. is playing down, the other progams will complete well with them.
Yes, und held the upper hand during those latter years in DII. But when scholarship levels were higher, that was not the case. I'm projecting that ndsu will again dominate when given the ability to stretch. Any intelligent person would understand this logic.
-
Yes, because UND never made the playoffs before ndsu left and DII became watered down. 
More bison spew.
Using 2003 and 36 scholarships to compare teams and project und success is a bunch of spew. That year and that scholarship level have no relevence, other than it makes good spew for you folks.
-
Five years ago UNO, UND, and UNC were clearly the top three teams. NDSU and SDSU were #4 and #5. Last year UNO, UND, and USD were clearly the top three teams. Granted, the conference wasn't as strong top to bottom last year as it was five years ago, but just as strong if not stronger at the top.
I know that comparing everything to 2003 is convenient for you, but it has no basis in reality. If you think that und and usd will be successful because of where ndsu was in 2003 (one of its worst records (not worst team) in history), then you haven't put much thought into things. It is all about scholarships and how well you leverage them at the next level of 63. The pecking order in 2003 means nothing. It's a new ballgame and its all about recruiting and funding at the 63 level. Und could be successful or they could pull a Unc, but your DII playoff appearances because of watered down competition will have no bearing on your success at the 63 scholarship level.
If you think the 2003 pecking order still exists, then you must not have TV at your house.
-
Using SDSU and NDSU both as examples, it almost seems as if playing a I-AA schedule is not as tough as the old NCC schedule used to be. Not that those teams played the toughest I-AA opponents in the first few years of their transition, but their won/lost records actually improved from where they had been while playing D2 schedules just a couple of years earlier. Weird.
Or maybe NDSU is capable of leveraging the 63 scholarship level more effectivey and recruit more effectively than most with the benefit of this 27 scholarship increase. If you think that you can compare and rationalize the 36 to 63 scholarship change by won-lost records in DII, you are in for an education. Also, the records during the first few years of a transition really do not mean much, as the schedule difficulty is realatively easy compared to a full FCS slate in a conference. In 2009 when UND plays a full great west slate and has a higher percentage of FCS competition on the schedule, your record will start to mean more in the FCS pecking order. This coming year in the Valley will be NDSU toughest test by far.
-
I would not be in favor of the MVC.
I would much rather make a go of it in the SL with a new Dakota based foundation of NDSU, UND, SDSU and USD. Along with Oral Roberts, Oakland, WIU, etc.
Montana and MSU wanted NDSU and SDSU in the Big Sky. The rest of the Sky told them to go **** themselves, they weren't paying the money for travel.
UND and USD ain't getting in. It will be west coast or mountain teams only.
You are nuts and certainly no bison fan with an idiotic statement like "NDSU would stay in the SL to keep the Dakota foundation together". The MVC would be the dream conference for the Bison, and we would move there in a second with only our best interest in mind. We would not sacraifice our future and stay in the Summit. I don't mean to sound smug . . . und/usd/sds/nds . . . any of us would leap the to MVC if offered the chance as this is a top 10 basketball conference. I don't know where you make up this worthless crap.
-
The NC$$'s policy was very clear when it came out August 2005. NO Native American names/logos/mascots for NC$$ membership schools or NO hosting championship events, period. Then, they changed their minds because a school that made them multimillions of dollars objected. So, that resulted in a NEW policy. A name sake tribe objected but because they are not in said state they don't count.
Sorry, Herd. There is no uniformity in the NC$$ policy. The only uniformity is whatever benefits the NC$$.
You are correct, the current policy by the NCAA requires full tribal support. You either do, or you don't. It is quite simple. Those that do have been exempted.
-
I'm not confused. I hold the positon there is no uniformity based on the NC$$ own actions of exempting some schools and not others. Oh sure, they dance around the issue by stating the 'namesake' tribes ultimately can give or deny permission for the use of 'their' names. Bull-snot!! The use of Native American names/logos/mascots is hostile and abuse for all (uniformity) or it's not.
The NC$$ makes so much sense!
http://republicans.edlabor.house.gov/archi...06/franklin.htm
No, the ncaa's position is very clear. If you have full support within the Tribal Leadership, you are exempted, period. The ncaa is not voicing an opinion, they are enforcing a clear policy requiring full tribal support before issuing an exemption. Anything less, and they would face massive litigation.
Your choosing to hold a position and have an opinion does not change the facts.
-
Uniformity means the absence of alternatives. If something is offensive and abusive for one than according to uniformity (and the NC$$) it is for all.... unless it isn't? How does that make sense? If George doesn't like getting his butt pinched and Nancy does, it's ok? No!! Nancy may like getting her butt pinched but if George witnesses it, that is sexual harassment.
Because the Seminoles in Oklahoma find the name hostile and abusive but the Seminoles in Florida don't that makes the name hostile and abusive but not hostile and abusive? The NC$$ allowing FSU, et al, the use of Native American names/logos/mascots shows there is no uniformity. It is either ok or it's not ok. The lose of our name and logo would be easier to swallow if there were no exemptions, including the NC$$'s sponsor, Pontiac!
You are trying very hard to confuse yourself, and the facts. It's OK, when the Indian tribes and their leaders say it OK, and tell the NCAA uniformly that it OK. Your opinion, my opinion and voting does not matter.
There is uniform support by the Seminole Indian tribes in Florida for FSU to use the nickname (The Okla tribe is a non-Issue for FSU in the state of FL). There is not uniform support by the Sioux tribes in ND to use the nickname. If there was uniform support in ND, there would not be an issue in ND either. Those are the facts.
-
Wrong.
First, the "workplace" is by definition an NCAA championship event, not a campus, or so sayeth the NCAA.
Next, certain members of the (albeit Oklahoma) Seminole Nation declared an issue with FSU. By your own words:
We had that one person from the Seminole Nation just as we have that one from the Sioux Nation.
We have one person with a problem with it in the "workplace".
Yet, FSU got off.
The "Workplace" is the Indian tribes in the respective states that or represent the school nickname. There is uniformity in Florida for FSU to use the Seminole nickname in association with their school. If there was not uniformity in Florida, they would be in the same boat as ND. "Harassment" claims in the "Workplace" as I have defined it for you are the death penalty to a nickname. I am just pointing out that the tribes and NCAA do not view this as a majority decision or vote. There must be uniformity of support on the inside of the "workplace".
That is how this situation is being viewed and implemented by the NCAA . . . it will not be voted on, even though the vote would show a majority in favor of retaining the nickname.
-
The "workplace" notion is a nice try until you remember the "FSU" exemption.
And "gettin' back at the man" is so clich
-
In a workplace harassment situation (which I believe that some liken this situation to . . . NCAA, some native americans), when someone is offended by a Action, a Joke, a Comment, a picture in the wall, etc, etc . . . you don't bring the entire office into a meeting and ask them to vote if the Action, the Joke, the Picture on the wall is offensive.
If the Action, the Joke, the Picture on the wall, etc . . . is offensive to one person while files a claim to the human resource organization, that's all it takes. If 9 out of 10 people don't think that the situation was harassment, but 1 person does, that's all it takes. In a workplace situation that's how it works, no questions aksed. Decisive action is taken to support the view of the 1 person . . . in a workpalce situation.
I believe that's how the NCAA and the Indian leader view this situation. For Ron His Horse, the logic of putting this situation to a vote does not apply. I believe that this is how the situation is viewed by some. I am not saying that I agree with this logic with regard to the nickname, but I liken their viewpoint to a workplace harassment sitation. To them the logic of . . . "let's see what the majority thinks", does not apply as it is offensive to some.
Unless people understand this viewpoint, right or wrong, I don't think that they understand where these groups are coming from. They do not view this as "Let's see what the majority thinks". Again, these are observations of the position that I believe these groups are coming from.
-
ok NDSU fan... I know you guys have done well since making the jump up; however you have got to be stupid to think WE, UND, will not do well. Granite you guys were somewhat competitive your last few years at D2. Look at SDSU, whom beat you last year, they were always in the bottom half of the NCC. The old NCC was a FCS conference, and give us credit where due. They benefited by jumping up because they have more cupcake games now then they did in the NCC. We were better then the two of you when you jumped, and we will transition just as good if not better!
Being successful is mostly dependent on being in a conference within the next 3-4 years. If you come out of the transition as an independent in basketball and the major sports, it will not be good. That will trump wins and losses as the gauge of success. Ndsu is not your measuring stick as many think, it's conference affiliation so you can generate fan interest and dollars for your major sports. Without conference affiliation, it will be difficult to fund programs at DI.
3-4 years is a long time, and I would guess that the dynamic in either the Summit or the Sky would change by then, but the other factor is the 4 year moritorium to the FBS's 11 conferences that is impacting everyone in DI and stagnating movement. Your school has a lot to offer, and I would be surprised if you were an independent in 2012. But that would probably be considered failure by the regime.
Success has very little to do with you good your teams are, unless this is a factor in a conference extending and invitation. If you won very few BB games but got into a conference, you will be claiming success in your transition. If you win a few big games but are an independent in 4 years, it will be hard to claim any real success.
-
I agree with you on the first part; it gets old and has been for awhile.
As far as rings, I've never envisioned a ring symbolizing a national champions; I've always envisioned a championship trophy. It would be interesting to hear what players on teams do get, if anything.
The combination of being 10-1, winning the conference title, being ranked in the top 10, and being denied the opportunity to compete for a National title when you would have easily got an invite had you been eligible . . . the combination warranted rings.
The GWFC title was not the only reason for the rings.
-
That's a bold move considering they weren't even conference champions. Were they made of paper for the "paper champions"?
Hmmmm . . . that's the same paper championship that you will be playing for over the next 5+ years. That's got to suck.
-
Don't you mean 4? The Sioux will be playoff eligible in 2012. That leaves 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011 as the non-playoff eligible years. I realize counting isn't one of the strong points of Bison fans, but you'll have to take my word for it when I tell you that it is in fact four years of no playoffs. The fifth year is when you actually become playoff eligible. You'd think with the cows being playoff eligible in this their upcoming fifth season of I-AA you'd have figured that out by now.
Thanks for the correction Dave! That means a lot coming from a guy that doesn't know what football division he is in.
-
2nd that! When NDSU hosts a playoff FB in the Dome or has a men's basketball team that can do something in the postseason, get back to me. SU didn't anything in it's last few years in D2 and one big win here and there in D1 FB or BB doesn't qualify for all the arrogance that I deal with from Bison fans here in Fargo.
NDSU has had top caliber playoff teams in football and would have made a Summit tournament run in Basketball this past year had they been eligible. Our football team has been top caliber in FCS the past two years. For anyone wearing kelley green to knock our football team is nothing short of laughable
I will be sure to send you annual reminders the next five years how your teams have done nothing if the criteria for being good is being in the playoffs. I guess the next 5 years your teams will be nothing. I hope you enjoy it because you certainly deserve it.
Great West to become All Sports Conference?
in NCAA News
Posted
This is a good step for und, I will agree. But if you going to do something like this, why wouldn't you just fight to take the whole NCC to DI, it's the same difference. You play for conference championships with no post season competition for 10-13 years.