jdub27

I'd expect to see the final choices for students to choose from released in the next couple days.

Don't do dumb stuff to get your name in the paper and you don't have to worry about consequences. That being said, it is a fairly minor thing, though definitely not very smart. They didn't try to beat anyone up or run away while they were handcuffed, so it could always be worse.

I used the actual 2016-2017 numbers for WT and WG, which combined for expenses of just over $500K. I just used the estimated budget of $1 million that was thrown around. I'd guess that UND's total expense would be slightly above average due to travel expenses, so that is probably a fair estimate. So you're looking at roughly an extra $400-500K in expenses while gaining somewhere around the equivalency of 5 more tuition units/year. That doesn't make up the difference in costs.

Las season, women's golf gave out 4.6 scholarships with 9 players on the roster, meaning they "brought in" around 4.4 "units" of tuition dollars while showing a Net loss of $171K. There was one ND player on the roster out of 9. Women's tennis gave out 4.4 scholarships and their were 13 players on the roster. They "brought in" 8.6 "units" of tuition dollars while showing a Net loss of $222K loss. 5 of the 13 players were from ND. Using your formula of offsetting losses with non-scholarship tuition dollars, I'd say both of these programs are actually doing pretty decent. Average NCAA women's lacrosse team has 30 players and they can give up to 12 scholarships, leaving 18 "units" of tuition they would "bring in". So you're cutting 2 sports to gain roughly 5 tuition "units", while the budget for lacrosse is at least double what women's tennis and golf are currently costing (combined for $513K in total expenses in 2017). I don't think the math pencils out on this one.

The setup had been the wishes of the head coach. If you want it changed, he's the one to talk to. However, I agree they should go back to the Alerus and make it more of an event. Nicer weather for some tailgating yesterday would have been nice, but can't really control that. Moving it out of town is a really bad idea for multiple reasons. Just to name a few: It's a big junior recruiting weekend, student athletes are still in class and they would either have to stay over night or be on a bus all day for a 2 hour event and miss classes, the support would be questionable.

This is where I'm at as well. I saw a few nice throws but some questionable decision making and poor throws as well. Not saying with more time, he can't improve, but I think Ketteringham has more to offer.

Well, obviously 6 years isn't enough for some people to move on. UND should probably just halt everything for another decade and see if they'll come around and accept reality that it's just a nickname and logo, not a deity. Life is full of changes, it is what it is.

I'm actually pretty sure that was one of the arguments made a decade ago. However the decision was made to keep them in the best seats in the house. I don't even recall who was on what side anymore but it isn't a new discussion.

The problem is, you only have less than half the amount of seats so you're going to have to convince people that have had their lower bowl seats for 15+ years that this it would be a good idea. Pretty sure this was a big discussion that went on for multiple years before and after the REA opened. There were many talks about moving the students and changing sections. The theory was always that they would have the best seats in the house and that's why they've stayed where they are. Maybe that mindset has changed. But I don't think you'll ever see them increase the amount of lower bowl sections they have.

We'll have to disagree on that. Not saying the comparison is apples to apples, but that isn't how the real world works. If your'e being compensated to represent someone/something, you shouldn't be publicly doing things that are the opposite of a stated goal. I'll agree that there is a difference between not embracing or showing apathy towards it, which would be fine, but continuing to push the Fighting Sioux stuff is something that I think is unnecessary from the team.

I get what you're saying but you're quite a bit of revenue from the Champions Club if you do that. They are already hamstrung trying to increase donations without more lower bowl seats to sell. Taking away 2 more sections doesn't help that at all. Unfortunately the demand for lower bowl seats is significantly more than the demand for tickets in general. People are willing to pay a pretty decent premium to be in the lower bowl.

I mean, yeah, it kind of is. The University is spending resources on branding (which was severely lacking the last decade, since there was no actually identity or brand to promote) and you have a group of very in-the-public individuals who are not only supposed to represent the University but are also getting scholarships and full cost of attendance from the University and they are basically publicly speaking out against that mission whether it be directly or indirectly. Not only that, but the public display of supporting the old nickname only encourages the general public who are looking for a reason to not move on and enables the "Sioux Forever" line of thinking because if the hockey team isn't going to move on, why should they?

Prepare to be disappointed. Designs should be released for a student vote over the next few weeks.

I mean if you don't think the continued hanging on to the Fighting Sioux nickname has gotten a little old and over the top, then I'm not sure what to tell you. The chants at hockey games and booing of the new nickname, responses to anything mentioning Fighting Hawks on social media by UND and non-UND accounts, continued comments by student-athletes about being Fighting Sioux when they were in junior high or younger the last time UND actually was known as the Fighting Sioux, etc. I mean, people get it, there's a large group don't like the new name or logo and that's fine. But yelling or proclaiming "Sioux Forever" every chance you get while making negative comments about the current nickname and logo isn't going to bring back the name or change anything, it just shows that they haven't grasped the reality of the situation yet. I personally don't care if people haven't moved on, but I don't need to hear about it every time the new nickname and logo is mentioned. I'd much rather spend time discussing the actual teams, the last decade plus of hearing about the nickname has been more than enough.

No I didn't. You're stating that it likely happened. It didn't.

Once you've signed it, you can't go to another college unless you are released from it and the school can put conditions on it.

Yes, but the difference will be that it will end up being one of the upper bowl sections, not one of the lower bowl. NDSU students lost their best section in the deal but got $100K/year in student fees back along with priority for SRO tickets.

I'd really like to hear what you consider "talks" and who was doing the talking because I'm pretty sure it's absolutely false. Message board theories are much different than actual "talks". On top of that, even if it wasn't, the B1G would monetarily have to make it worth it to UND to consider joining since their would be a large buyout from the NCHC and UND gets conference distributions. The B1G has zero history of paying associate members in the few instances they have added them. UND is (rightfully) not considered a peer to the B1G schools which is already a big strike and the non-hockey schools have no incentive to give away TV money to a school that will not add to the overall bottom line for the conference if they could even move the needle at all.

This is a fair point and I agree that kids are getting recruited too young. Because schools know that all of these kids aren't going to develop, it leads to over-recruiting and leaves kids scrambling. However the way it's presented using the term Minnesota's "short list" comes off as arrogant. Couple that with stating they will no longer recognize any verbal commitment made before a kid is 17 just screams "we are better than you". Not saying that UM isn't one of the top schools kids have to choose from, but to specifically tell players to tell other schools that they will reserve the right to ignore their previous commitment the day the turn 17 to commit to UM is presented in a pretty smug way.

So not only are we making up events that have never had an inkling of being true (UND being invited to the B1G), now we're also making up what people's thoughts on those fantasies are?

Probably fair to point out that UND did take a section of hockey seats away from students a few years ago but they took away the least desirable one and have used it for single game tickets instead of the most desirable ones and converted it season tickets.. Will be interesting to see if there is any reaction from the students. Seems like the athletic department got the money they were looking for last year when they asked to raise student fees for "travel and equipment" (not budget cuts ) by just taking seats away and selling them to season ticket holders.

That also doesn't include the junior who decided to pass on his senior season to go to med school.

Stecher had 2G/9A and 3G/10A his freshman and sophomore years. Caggigiula was a bit better going 8G/8A and 11G/13A. No doubt the sophomore class needs to step up its game but Mismash had 9G/13A, Kawaguchi had 5G/14A and Adams had 5G/3A (playing 12 less games than the other two) as freshman. All of those compare pretty favorably. Rodwell, Pattyn, Olson are all guys who made a pretty big jump from underclassman to upperclassman years in terms of production. There are others, but those are the most obvious examples.

Yet the plan to fix them have been in the works for a couple years. There are only so many projects that can be done in a year and there hasn't been a lack of large ones that have impacted traffic recently.

How is that possible?? We were just told UND is getting spanked by UMD and Denver in the attendance department. I guess if you combine their attendance then they outpace UND 11,475 to 11,408, maybe that's what we're missing.