SooToo
-
Posts
530 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by SooToo
-
-
University of Surrender before the fight is over - More Bungling by those who think they are smarter than the real Sioux Fans
The depth of your irrationality on this subject is truly mind-boggling.
-
As far as the Big Sky Conference is concerned, I think we are EFFED, either way the June 6th vote turns out.
Disagree. If the legislation fails --and the threatened constitutional amendment doesn't happen -- I think UND is in. That's certainly been the tone of comments I've heard from Fullerton. (And please tell me you're pessimistic assessment of the Big Sky isn't just another rationalization to keep the nickname.)
At this point, I hope and expect the SBoHE will challenge the constitutionality of the law requiring the nickname that was passed last session. No lawyer, but I would hope/expect they would win. I've got to believe its abundantly clear to most legislators now that maintaining the nickname will have dire consequences, and I can't believe they'd have much enthusiasm to penalize/aggressively oppose this SBoHE move. Rendering the law -- and initiated measure -- moot might encourage the petition drive for a constitutional measure, but it would provide more time for an organized effort to fight it. IIRC, the bar for passage of a consitutional measure is higher (60%?) and there would be additional arguments for keeping the constitution clear of this type of issue.
In any event, there needs to be a well-organized PR campaign -- perhaps partially funded by university backers on this forum -- to educate voters on the repercussions of passage of either of these two measures. Faison, UND coaches and maybe some hockey alumni should be recruited to participate. Most native North Dakotans understand the populist/isolationist leanings that lead many here to say "Hell no!" when told by a large, out-of-state entity that they have to change. But I've got to believe that getting the word out about the crippling consequences of keeping the name would convince a majority of voters to make the right decision. Whether that could happen before June, however, is an open question.
And on a related point: What should Hakstol's standing with the university be if the law he played a significant role is passing ultimately ends up crippling the athletic department in which he is employed?
-
It was done a long time ago in a tribal ceremony. If permission wasn't granted we wouldn't be having this discussion today -- period. We would have had another nickname that we cultivated and branded over the years and wouldn't have to start over 50 years later.
Apparently, the next generation of leadership at SR didn't get the memo.
-
... I fully agree with Ralph Engelstad that Professors that were slamming UND about the nickname years ago should have been fired because they worked for the institution. The fact that it now appears to be the other way around is really upsetting. If someone would have had the common sense back then to tell the Professor's to shut their yap if they want to remain employed at UND, then maybe it would never have come to this. ...
...or maybe we should have dumped the arrogance and intimidation years ago and stated an honest discussion with the people who held the power on this issue all along: the tribes in North Dakota. At this point, however, I'm not sure doling out blame gets anything done.
-
We are in the 10% of the mid-majors that do not lose money. Funny, based on your logic they would have voted us out after South Dakota left, or maybe after the constitutional amendment to keed the name, or yesterday. Well they haven't have they? Fullerton is on record as saying they are taking a wait and see aproach and we are in the Big Sky as long as we are a viable member...I say we will be a viable member for a long time...you obviously say we won't. Time will tell my friend...
I'm aware UND makes money; I read the financials and I'm thrilled. But how does that benefit other members of the Big Sky financially? I'm unaware of a constitutional amendment to keep the nickname; maybe you're referring to the petition drive to get one on the ballot. The Big Sky hasn't made any moves because, so far, nothing has happened here. We'll see how long they wait if/when either of the ballot measures passes. Judging by Fullerton's comments, I'm guessing it won't be long. I trust you'll be around to assure us that everything is just fine.
-
What? Get a clue! The Big Sky conference like all other conferences are a for profit organization. They pay Fullerton's salary. The more money BSC makes more money Fullerton makes. Fullerton could care less about the nickname and has said so publically. He just wants it resolved. Why? Because he sees UND as an asset to his company. If we are under NCAA sanctions we would stand to make less money for the conference (i.e. road football playoff games). To him less money is not good. He is protecting his asset and wants to be able to get as much money out of it as he can. As long as we make money for the conference (and we will with or without NCAA sanctions) we are good but more is better and that is why he wants this resolved. Always follow the money and you will see the answer!
Congratulations. An excellent summary of some of the delusional drivel perpetuated by the nickname only crowd. I guess the Big Sky doesn't need UND more than UND needs the Big Sky ... but almost.
I'm unclear how the BSC "makes more money" with a marginalized UND as a member when 90% of mid-major/FCS porgrams are money losers. Is it in the further subdivision of the league' support from the NCAA? Maybe it's in the additional travel expense for other members to come to ND. I agree UND has intrinsic value to the Big Sky due to its academic programs, but I'm not sure there's a lot of money to be made with that one. UND had value in stabilizing the conference, allowing for divisional play and expanding the leagues foot print, but much of that value vanished when USD bailed out the back door at the last instant. It's laughable to claim UND brings the Big Sky much exposure in the Twin Cities, especially since Lucia appears to be putting together a plan to keep UND off Minnesota's schedule for the foreseeable future. The regional television coverage? Apparently traded away to prop up the new hockey conference.
Hard to find the "profit" that would convince Big Sky presidents to put up with the negatives a sanctioned UND would bring to the conference. Hard to see why Fullerton would be blowing smoke on the consequences for UND of keeping the nickname.
-
Two facets of this boondoggle that continually amaze:
1) The unending propensity of the nickname-only crowd (Chewey, crazy Dave, et al) to spout flights of fancy and irrational assumption as fact despite all evidence to the contrary. (I'm still waiting for the post-New Year's announcement, promised so frequently by Star last fall, that the Montana schools are off for the WAC, proving that "the Big Sky needs UND more than we need the Big Sky."); and;
2) The eagerness of some supposed UND supporters (e.g. Scott Hennen) to continually exploit this as some sort of larger liberal-v-conservative poitical issue regardless of cost to the University.
-
It comes down to funding revenue. Their marginal cost is much lower than on campus students but UND get's the same funding from the state per student, which is already higher than NDSU on a per-person basis, while these people pay far more than regular tuition.
I realize this is the mantra down at Bisonville and among boosters of the AC in general, but the state doesn't and never has funded higher ed on a "per student" basis. It's not elementary ed. While enrollment obviously is a factor, funding also hinges on the costs associated with that institution's physical plant (which can vary greatly due to age and other factors), historic program costs and, in most recent years, funding levels at comparable peer institutions. I'm also interested in your assertion that the "marginal cost is much lower" for on-line students. Do you base that on specific program budget numbers or just your general sense that on-line students cost less because they're not taking up floor space at the student union?
-
2
-
-
Before we go bag on Fox News, it's an associated press story, Fox didn't write it.
Yes, you're correct .... and it's the headline writing that's F'd up; the story is just fine.
-
Rivals lists two additional prospects in Henderson, NV, Tuilagi's home town:
-- QB Kamana Nacua 6'2" 180
-- RB Niko Kapelli 5'9" 190
-
A little blurb about Jared Tuilagi at the end of this article.
http://www.nevadapre...-138304549.html
Rivals now showing Tuilagi as a UND commit.
-
I like the potential of some of the current tailbacks, but it seems a bit strange to me we wouldn't sign a RB this year; I think there is effectively only one with last year's class (Sparks) after Garman played as a true freshman. I don't know anything about them aside from their post-season accolades, but Sam Sura and Antonio Ford out of the Cities would seem to be good prospects. I've heard very little about either, recruiting-wise.
-
They should move them over another section while they are at it. NCAA rules don't allow the students to be seated between the 35 yard lines during the playoffs..................
Actually, for the sake of TV presentation, I wish they'd totally flip the field, move the Sioux bench to the west side along with all of the season ticketholders................
.... or move the cameras to the west side.
-
1
-
-
/facepalm
I think it's called humor, buddy; a little joke for all those who insist on playing "mine is bigger than yours" with any subject involving UND and the AC. Thank goodness this is one instance where we can actually see who "lights it up" on the court. Sorry you couldn't play along.
-
During a period break of last night's hockey game, I noticed a tall young guy in the Sioux Shop wearing a T shirt referencing the Illinois 6A or 8A football championship. He appeared to be there with his father. After looking at his photo, I think this may have been Ryan Bartels, the Illinois QB recruit. Anyone know if other recruits were in town this weekend? Seems like a good time to bring some prospects through before the dead period.
-
...but on the bright side, UND is getting excellent coverage in The Forum; on the morning of the AC's biggest football game ever (I guess), UND warrants a six-column banner headline at the top of the Forum sports page. Obviously the always neutral editorial staff at The Forum finally has recognized just how many fans of THE University of North Dakota are within its circulation area. I for one look forward to this type of extensive coverage of football next fall, when UND enters the Big Sky
-
From the OPE report...
NDSU Football
Total expenses 3,332,907
Total revenue 3,332,907
NDSU Basketball
Total expenses 1,988,215
Total revenue 1,988,215
I now have a better understanding of Dan's extreme suspicion of institutional accounting.
-
OPE has UND's 2011 figures posted.... http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/
Expenses $17,388,512.00
Revenue: $17,512,522.00
$124,010.00 in the black.
Great site and info. I was somewhat surprised to see that UND, according to the report, actually makes money on football (although only about $20k). Also note that Montana's budget is about $1.7 million less than UND's total but they spend and earn twice as much on football, roughly $5 million, and spend about $500,000 more on basketball. It will be interesting to see where UND can go with football revenues once established in a solid conference like the Big Sky
-
If NDSU's fans, administrators, or stakeholders feel that online education is simply just a fad not to be taken seriously, then it is just another example of them being behind the times and continuing to lag behind................
Gotta remember, though, its hard to learn milking on line.
-
1
-
-
Last year was last year...what I saw vs. Drake and what I saw from the two teams today wasn't close to the same talent...even with our "better" QB this year. The Big Sky is a great conference with some very good teams. UND will need to build to get to the level of play I saw today. Maybe next week's game vs. Black Hills might change my mind though??
Game plan? Have you watched a Muss coached team in the last couple of years!
Your comment on the Alerus is very true though. The Al seats half of what Griz Stadium does so in theory UND should be able to fill it...you are correct in that fan support is key.
A lackluster first game -- which they won, as you may recall -- and you're ready to write off the season? It's obvious you have no regard for Mussman, but why not give the team a chance? It's very much the same as the team that competed at Montana last year, with the addition of a serviceable QB, so maybe there's a chance they'll be more competitive as the season progresses.
UND is losing right now at Fresno State, 14-9 at the end of the first quarter. The rushing yardage so far is UND 104 and Fresno -3, so maybe the coaching is improving.
-
I would say you are about right in your assessment. UND needs to get it's O in gear - 1 offensive TD per game isn't going to do it.
Damn, Dan. Every day I read SiouxSports. And every day there are more and more posters from the AC. Right away I get my underwear in a bunch expecting more snide, smart-ass cheap shots that add nothing to the conversation. I'm rarely disappointed. Then you post a reasonable comment like this.
Cut it out. You're effin' with my preconceptions.
-
Sorry, no offense, but looks like the PC narrative that used to go like ..... it's all about what the Indians want ... to .... it's all about the student athletes need ... is now parroted by the fan base.
Again, since I believe that the Big Sky situation is nothing but a bluff, the only team that will really may be impacted is football, if they become a playoff team again. That would be a wonderful "problem" to have.
Really? I think you're confusing "PC narrative" with "facts."
I've forgotten on what basis you've concluded that statements from the BSC are "nothing but a bluff," but I've yet to see a good explanation -- or any explanation, aside from the Great Berkley Conspiracy against NA Nicknames -- why they would be bluffing at all. What did they stand to gain?
The BSC is the second of two potential conferences to express reservations about accepting UND with the nickname controversy (thank God things didn't work out with the Summit). It's not just the position of NCAA bureaucrats but many member schools as well, who several years ago demonstrated their backing of the NA policy by affirming after the fact the NCAA executive committee's authority to make rules like this. Minnesota won't play us in any sport; Wisconsin has indicated a similar position. And yes, without conference affiliation, ALL UND athletes would be handicapped. More importantly, the athletic program would be decimated. Why in the world would UND choose pariah status with so little evidence -- if any -- that everyone else is only bluffing. Too bad at this stage of the game we're still dealing with this issue.
As to your observation on the UND-Drake game, I would agree; Lackluster performance on the field and little energy in the stands, at least after the first half. Hopefully the O line improves (disappointing number of sacks versus a no-scholly team) and Mussman opens up the playbook and the team shows a lot more offensive potential against Idaho next week.
-
UND has done something wrong. They are planning on retiring the nickname. They have announced their intention to have the name gone by the new year.
How in the world does planning violate the law requiring UND to keep the nickname? Everyone in the state, except ol' Al, seems to have acknowledged that given the potential ramifications for UND the law has to go. When did it become illegal to think about making a change?
As many noted from the beginning, this never was about UND or the Fighting Sioux nickname; this always was, for Al and his cronies, about asserting legislative control over the SBoHE. Now he wants to lay claim to the right to micromanage administrators at the campus level as well.
-
If Hendrickson is such a great team guy you'd think he would move to another position to help out the team if thats what the coaches felt was the right move. I know I've said he should switch positions before, but I truly feel like he could help the team by playing wide receiver or maybe even returning kicks.
Heck, he could line up in the secondary on defense....those guys didn't cover anyone last year...
Of course he's already switched positions at the request/suggestion of the coaching staff -- twice just last year. I haven't heard that they've asked yet another change from him this year.
Goska and Hendrickson didn't look good last year, but Hendrickson spent most of the year practicing at WR. I'm certainly no football coach but for my money, he was the best looking QB at the spring game. He stood in the pocket when he needed to and ran well when it was time to scramble. He threw accurately on the run and showed a nice touch completing the mid-level throws, something no one at UND was able to do last year. I don't know who'll end up as the starting QB, but I wouldn't be too discouraged if it was Hendrickson.
Alumni Association begins campaign against nickname
in UND Nickname
Posted
I would gladly donate to help get the message out, and I hope other University supporters would, too. Hope for an expedited review of the state law before the state supreme court. Then a month or so before the election -- June or November -- launch a PR campaign on multiple levels. This issue needs recognizable faces associated with the university -- Faison, Jim Kleinsasser, maybe Dale Lennon, somebody from hockey -- on TV and on radio explaining their respect for the Fighting Sioux name and the consequences of keeping it.
.