JackJD

Scanning through this thread...saw "Oilers" suggested. Is there any reason why that name wouldn't be given consideration? I thought that was a good recommendation. I liked the name of the old AFL Houston Oilers (Tn Titans now).

Incorrect. SDSU and NDSU continue to be connected. If the MVFC made any additional moves, USD has the advantage of a little better location than SDSU and a lot better location than NDSU.

I admit I haven't read the entire thread (so it's possible this one has been suggested before): How come no one is talking about using "Oilers" for a name? As a kid, I followed the Houston Oilers and always thought it was a cool name.

Just a comment on paragraph two re: the story about the reluctance of the Japanese to attack mainland USA.... First, on the subject of this thread, I'm an outsider but if I had a connection with UND, I would be in lockstep with UNDColorado. Now, on the story about the Japanese generals: that's a popular story that makes the rounds but it is not true. Many claim it is stated in a book but try to find a scholarly book making such a statement and supporting it with some sort of research. Admiral Yamamoto, having studied in the USA, is credited with the comment about "waking a sleeping giant" made prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor. He knew all about our natural resources and the spirit of the Americans. There was no plan to keep going to mainland USA...the Japanese Navy would have been stretched way too far. Japan had been running around SE Asia for years and its military leaders had concluded that the USA was meddling too much in its sphere of influence and inevitably would enter the war. So they hit first. They were interested in the USA butting out of SE Asia. For anyone interested in the subject of the Pacific Theatre in WWII, go right to Prof. Gordon Prange's books starting with "At Dawn We Slept". It seems every phrase is footnoted (exaggeration) yet they are eminently readable.

Final in Fargo: SDSU 91, NDSU 88 in overtime

Final: SDSU 92, Washington 73. Closest Washington could close was 11 points a couple of times in the second half. Wolters had 34 points, 16 in the first half. SDSU put up 51 points in the first half, most points scored on UW in the first half this year. Also SDSU put up more points against UW than Duke did a couple weeks ago. Washington's home, non-conference win streaks ends at 32.

For a little perspective on UND's win over SDSU at Grand Forks...to show your fans UND beat a good team: With about 7:00 to go in the half, SDSU 39, U of Washington 18. The Huskies aren't quite sure what to make of the Jackrabbits. Of course, lots of game left and the Huskies are a very good team and are favored to pull this one out. They haven't lost a home, non-conference game in 32 games.

Congrats to UND -- payback can be fun. It sounded like your team came out firing and didn't look back. I suppose UND and SDSU can compare and contrast the two games and learn something from both. Both squads have a lot of youth so there will be some ups and downs. An oath? (And, I still haven't been to a game in Grand Forks in a long, long time.) If I recall the nature of the comment you may be referring to, you're taking things out of context but, heck, it's your board so have at it (you usually do!). Back to basketball and going forward: I think it's important that our respective schools have some bus-trip games to play. I have some interest in UND v SDSU basketball going back to my college days when UND had some good years and won about 2/3rds of the contests it had with SDSU. And, I will travel to some of the SDSU away games in the region and Grand Forks isn't a bad drive.

My wife's car has a better radio than the one in my vehicle...we pick up WNAX when leaving the Fargodome but I agree, it's not a perfect signal. I attributed the scratchiness to static electricity from all the buffalo hides. I thought about coming up for the game -- haven't been to a basketball game at UND before -- but it didn't work out so I'll listen on the radio. If I had to guess, I'd say the game will be hotly contested for most of its duration and should be some pretty good basketball.

I pick up a clear signal from WNAX (AM 570) when I'm in Fargo but I doubt the signal carries to Grand Forks. KSDR Radio (AM 1480) out of Watertown should also carry the game but unless there's something weird about the weather/clouds etc., I don't think KSDR reaches Fargo, let alone Grand Forks. Wolters will play in the game. His ankle is sore and you may not see him drive to the basket very often but you'll see some very good ball handling, passing and shooting. For those having some familiarity with lakesbison, you'll appreciate this: lakesbison is still so ticked off that Wolters didn't go to NDSU that he takes every chance he can to rip on the guy. ANYBODY lakesbison doesn't like is OK in my book.

I know the foregoing comments are complimentary of SDSU's play in the game. However, saying SDSU is not as athletic as UND is simply wrong. If you get the chance to watch the tape, do so. SDSU (finally) has a legit D-1 ball club and tonight they played like they are capable on both offense and defense. I have no doubt the rematch in Grand Forks is going to be an entirely different game and I'm not going to attempt to predict the margin of victory but UND still has its work cut out trying to beat the Jackrabbits.

Isn't the NDSU fight song officially called "We are the Pride"? See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_are_the_Pride NDSU's marching band is the Gold Star Band but in the past was sometimes called the Pride of North Dakota. SDSU's marching band is called the "Pride of the Dakotas".

Doesn't Calvary have some religious overtones?

The actual age was 30, not 40. Jerry Rubin, one of the leaders of the "Yippies", said 'don't trust anyone over 30.' Nonetheless, your point is worth noting. Many making rules and enforcing rules belong to the generation that will be remembered as one which spent its youth rejecting authority. (Hey, I'm 57 so I guess that's my generation -- the Baby Boomers.) Of course, as you noted, 'massive stereotyping' going on here; but, we can now see that the baby boomers have more than its fair share of jerks and idiots. No matter how one cuts it, its seems like there's a few people runnin amok in Grand Forks (this could happen on many college campuses). At the very least, the women's claims have been seriously called into question and further investigation should take place.

Until 2009, Western Illinois called its men's teams the "Leathernecks" and the women the "Westerwinds". In 2009, the school unified the team nicknames to Leathernecks for both men's and women's teams. http://www.goleathernecks.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=62714&SPID=6882&DB_OEM_ID=12000&ATCLID=3746930 If you search on the internet, you'll find lots of current references to the women's teams at WIU called the Westerwinds but I think it was officially changed in 2009 as noted in the press release cited above.

The above makes very good sense.

Chewey: I've been practicing twice as long as you, 32 years, but that doesn't necessarily mean much -- just time. I stay out of bankruptcy court for exactly the point you made: stranger things have happened and I, too, have seen some stranger things come out of bankruptcy cases. So, I understand your point but I think a judge reforming the settlement in such a charged atmosphere won't happen --- now, if the settling parties could be pulled back together to fine tune the settlement, that's another story. Perhaps that's why Carlson is trying to set up a meeting. The NCAA would not exactly win a popularity contest these days so if they could be brought to the table, well, who knows what might happen. As an outsider, I cannot have the appreciation for the various sides to the debate like those who are closer to the situation. I know this: UND as an institution received high marks in the past (I continually read that various measures placed UND above NDSU, SDSU and USD) but lately no one hears about UND as an institution. The talk is all about the name dispute and I don't think that reflects well on the institution. The name dispute has to be brought to an end. If someday a book is written about the name dispute, I'll buy a copy.

Yes, that should be an alternative but it seems the SBoHE has no stomach to making such a challenge. I've read where UND has said it'll follow the law and I assume that's the SBoHE's position. The courts won't step in unless some party asks it to look at the constitutionality of the legislation. The relationship going forward between your legislature and the SBoHE will be another interesting story to follow.

Yeah, I know this is a message board. But, part of the fascination I have with following this issue and the collateral discussion on this message board and others, is based on the "ideas" being thrown about. I don't mean to single you out, Chewey, but the statement you made serves as an example of at least part of what makes this issue so interesting. What basis on God's green earth would some judge have to order a reformation of the settlement agreement? Do you think getting a solemn agreement "amended" as you call it, is that simple? I'll concede my opinion has no value on this issue but here it is anyway: The only way UND avoids a real train wreck (defined: getting the boot from Big Sky and then tryng to live in independent hell) is either (1) the legislature reverses course and repeals its law; or, (2) the Big Sky AND the NCAA change positions. #2 is not realistic and the NCAA's latest pronouncement says so. Getting legislators to admit they made a mistake will be near-impossible but it seems to me that's the best chance UND has for staying on the track. If you read Bisonville posters on this topic, its readlly apparent many (most) are gleeful UND appears to be in a stew but note also that many BV posters point out (accurately so, in my view) that nutcase Carlson didn't do UND any favors. Carlson seems to be ready to stand by his vote. I hope some of you write to Carlson and other legislators who voted for that goofy bill, telling them that even though losing the nickname/logo was the last thing you wanted to see, it was time to move on after the settlement and 'would you please repeal that law?!' Carlson seems convinced he did some great thing. He seems to think he has overwhelming support of ND voters. As long as he holds those opinions, you're stuck. He must be getting more feedback from people like "take my ball and go home DaveK" than the more reasonable UND fans. The impact of this issue goes beyond UND. My undergrad alma mater, SDSU, has made it clear that it won't consider scheduling UND after the return football game already committed. I contribute (what to me is) significant money to SDSU athletics. I like it when there are opponents in the region -- better use of money! The ND legislature may have taken UND out of the picture for a while...that costs SDSU money because most other opponents will cost more than the trip to Grand Forks. Final comment: I have said on other message boards that the actions of Carlson and his crew -- no matter what one thinks of their intentions -- does not mean NDSU will go unaffected by this mess. Lets said there's no change in UND's status. How long will it take the legislators to advance legislation requiring NDSU and UND to meet on the gridiron? Next session. I don't know how much more popcorn I can eat watching this unfold.

Looks like the US Justice Department's antitrust chief is asking the NCAA questions. Interesting. http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/318495/group/homepage/

Lets assume the NCAA is a monopoly. Is it proscribed by the anti-trust laws? That's the question. Not all monopolies are prohibited. For example, Major League Baseball has some exemptions. While not a 'monopoly', another example of an industry that is exempt from anti-trust laws is the insurance industry ... the Insurance Services Organization routinely disseminates premium rate information and develops uniform contracts of insurance, actions that in nearly every other industry would be found to be anti-competitive conduct. (There are valid policy reasons why the insurance industry is exempt from anti-trust laws.) For many years, AT&T was a monopoly...then, in the 1980s it was broken up. It was allowed to be a monopoly in part because its monopoly meant it could develop the best communications system in the world. There was a tradeoff: it was a controlled monopoly by government regulation. Each state had some form of public utilities commission which regulated rate increases etc. Often government issued licenses are a little monopolistic: in many states, communities can have a "local option" for issuing liquor licenses. That usually means the community is the only source for purchasing liquor. Bars in such communities have to buy from the city. An example: Brookings, SD has a municipally-owned liquor store (let me tell you...think about the revenue that brings in! There are many other examples of monopolies that exist and some are the government itself. My point: not every monopoly is prohibited and some are encouraged and protected. Some for-profit businesses may be actual monopolies due to the weird market. Example: in a given community there may be one company that cleans septic tanks.** They can charge just about what they want because no one else is doing it in the particular community. A monopoly? Yes. Violative of anti-trust laws? Probably not. So, I read about taking a shot at the NCAA based on anti-trust laws etc. Has that happened before? (Someone has to be first, right?) I have a hard time following the claims that the NCAA has somehow stepped over the anti-trust line or that the anti-trust rules even apply. Again, I'm not an expert on anti-trust issues but some speak/write with great confidence that the NCAA may have trouble with anti-trust claims and I'd like to see an explanation of that based on the Sherman and Clayton acts (and comparable state laws), the main laws on which such claims are based. ** favorite slogans of a local septic tank servicing company: "We're number 1 in the number 2 business" and "Satisfaction guaranteed or double your load back."

I do not claim any expertise in anti-trust law. But, I'm thinking about staying in a Holiday Inn Express so I may as well learn something in advance. Actually, I've been involved in a few cases in which anti-trust claims were asserted but in those cases the anti-trust issues were always quickly dismissed and the cases proceeded on other issues. Do you think the analogy with Microsoft is accurate? Microsoft is a for-profit business while the NCAA is a non-profit, voluntary association of schools which support amateur athletics. Now, I know the obvious: the NCAA makes huge money and for the most part, is the only college game in town (I agree that the NAIA is insignificant). But still, it is not a business in the technical sense like Microsoft. Are you (or anyone) aware of a party successfully asserting anti-trust claims against the NCAA in the past? Side note: anyone remember the old USFL and its anti-trust lawsuit against the NFL? The USFL won -- the jury found the NFL engaged in anti-competitve conduct which damagted the USFL.. But, the jury concluded the USFL was doomed irrespective of the anti-competitive conduct of the NFL. So, the USFL won $1.00. Under the applicable anti-trust law, the damages were trebled:. $3.00. I remember the USFL attorneys trying to put on a good face by claiming they were vindicated (yeah, right, couldn't buy a cup of Starbucks today with that $3.00 verdict). The court did award the USFL $5.5 million in attorneys fees, a decision allowed to stand on appeal. When the dust settled, the USFL had lost something like $160 million in its short existence. (I think it tried to argue that if the NFL hadn't stepped on its neck, the USFL would have climbed into profitability.)

I was making a little joke at Bisonville's expense: no shot taken at UND. (And, by the way, do you know who the Dean of South Dakota's law school is?) The UND team name / logo story continues to be fascinating.

Careful! That's how rumors on Bisonville get started.

Browsing through this thread while watching the Mizzou v Iowa football game, two things come to mind: 1. The debate on whether the Big Sky or the Summit/MVFC is better seems to never go away on this message board but on Bisonville it's hardly mentioned. I think that says something...not exactly sure what but it says something. 2. Many would disagree that USD is South Dakota's "flagship" university. Many would contend it is SDSU and use the very enrollment figures cited above as support for that position. Of course, USD fans will disagree. Bottom line: what the heck does flagship even mean anyway? And, whatever it may mean in North Dakota, it may have a slightly different meaning in South Dakota. Sheesh, Iowa just intercepted and ran it in, Iowa 27, Missouri 24 with a little more than 5:00 to go.