jdub27
-
Posts
9,732 -
Joined
-
Days Won
133
Posts posted by jdub27
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, fightingsioux4life said:You will defend anything and everything this athletic department does, no matter how bad the results are. All you ever offer are the same tired old boilerplate talking points.
Again, talking about things you have no clue about. Just because some people don't constantly state the same thing over and over again, trying to be louder each time, does not mean they aren't critical. One doesn't need to publicly proclaim everything anonymously to disagree with where things are at. Some choose to actually give input to those who are decision makers and express their disappointment and concerns, but I guess that's not enough.
That being said, I've said plenty of times I didn't agree with the timing of extension. If they felt they needed to do it for the looks of continuity, there should have been a significant trade-off in the buyout language.
1 hour ago, UND08 said:1 - The athletic department had the ability to make the change at a much more affordable cost but instead chose to tack on $750k+ last spring. Why is there no accountability for that decision?
2 - The reason for the change that you speak of is still employed by the University and has been for over a decade. The thought of giving said person more time to "fix" things rings awfully hollow to me when I compare our program to our immediate peers at the FCS level. I mean...Bob Nielson was on the hot seat two years ago...and since then has put his team into position to have back-to-back top 8 seeds into the FCS playoffs, while doing so with fewer resources than we have in Grand Forks. That's the kind of "fix" we needed a couple of years ago. Is the standard tough to live up to? Yes...but that's life in NDSU/SDSU's back yard.
The Bubba defenders had to know this discussion was coming after last year. I maintained a positive outlook throughout this season until the back-to-back losses at YSU/ISU(b). Couple that with the UNI debacle last year and it's readily apparent to me that this program will never be ready for the next step as it is currently constituted. If the Bubba defenders want to throw enough influence around to keep this going...that's their right (and apparently, they're quite good at it) ...but good luck filling the Alerus next year with Bo gone and a continuously porous defense (from a defensive head coach). I listened to the SDSU game on the radio (vs watching on TV or attending) and Mike Berg was very frank in his assessment of this team lacking speed and talent (especially on defense). That was honestly refreshing to me...since it's been readily apparent for awhile now. Any AD worth his weight in salt would be concerned...but oh well we got a hockey game in Austin TX to get ready for!
A lot of things I agree with here. Feel pretty confident the extension decision goes all the way to the top, but not the first or last time any athletic department is going to give out an extension that doesn't work out. Also it is why the buyout language is so frustrating.
Agreed on Nielson. USD fans were shocked he wasn't let go a few years ago. Not a fan of him, but have to give him credit for turning things around there.
Not much on the rest outside of agreeing the road losses to YSU/ISUb were absolutely deflating for the program (internally and externally). Not sure how you go from feeling being top 10 at 5-2 with a decent showing against a top 25 FBS team to being completely derailed the second half of the year. But here we are.
-
6
-
1
-
35 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:
Wonderful, let’s start pulling out CVs and such to see if it’s worth listening to each other on here …
I’ve coached high school football in North Dakota. I don’t anymore (stopped over 10 years ago) because it was not lucrative enough and my schedule didn’t allow it, but I’ll get back into it eventually … someday.
In the meantime, I watch a lot of football (again, as my schedule allows).
Was just a question as you're the one who made about "anyone who has been around the game". Also feel like you were the one who previously wanted to compare CV's against others (UNDFootball360 guys?)
Regardless, do appreciate and respect anyone who spends time coaching high school levels and below as it definitely isn't something you do for money or glory.We agree on more than we don't. How things change and what is realistic in what time frame as things sit today probably isn't one of them because I don't know where the athletic department is going to come up with the money to make an immediate change. Has to come from private donors, because as previously stated, the reaction from the academic side would (rightfully) be some significant backlash.
14 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:Wave the white flag and accept that this is as good as it will ever get? Nope, not today, not tomorrow, not ever.
You are part of the problem around here. Low expectations, no standards of any kind. Based on your assessment, we should just join the Pioneer League. I personally would rather drop the sport than do that, but that's just my opinion.
It's been 15+ years of mostly mind-numbing mediocrity and it's people with your attitude that have helped make it possible. Congratulations.
So your (sometimes incorrect) interpretation on people's thoughts on a message board is what is driving the athletic department? Do they somehow have more power than those that have sky high expectations? Why is it only some people who "make things possible"?
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, UND-FB-FAN said:
Anyone who has been around the game can see it.
Just so I know how serious to take your opinion since you're clearly positioning yourself as an expert who knows more than the current staff and pretty much everyone on this board, have you ever disclosed what level you "have been around football" at? I know you tried calling out some people to compare CV's a while back but don't recall that ever happening.
Not even asking because I disagree with your comments, we definitely agree on more than we don't but I'm not going to claim I'm a great football mind. Try to rely on those who have spent more time around the game at a higher level than I could ever imagine to understand nuances.
-
1
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, UND1983 said:
This is correct. Danny left due to Bubba staying on.
He didn't leave because Bubba was staying and/or got an extension, he left because UND can't guarantee him head coach in waiting. Officially offering someone a job that isn't open would have caused significant issues given ND public entity hiring laws. It is what it is, but probably worked out better for him and his replacement has proven to be pretty good.
-
3
-
-
45 minutes ago, zonadub said:
If NDSU and/or SDSU (and even USD) along with the Montanas and maybe Idaho moved to FBS, all indications are that UND cannot afford to make the move with them if the AD can’t come up with $1MM buyout. Doesn’t show that a $5MM move up fee would be possible.
disclaimer… doubt NDSU will get an invitation, but UND is not prepared to be ready if they do.
Coming up with buyout money is different than money to upgrade your standing within the athletic world.
I don't think the $5MM would be the hurdle if there was an FBS invite. I think all the schools you mentioned would be able to figure that out. It is the sustained cost of upgrading the budget by a decent amount that would be the hurdle for any of the schools you mentioned. Some have publicly stated as much. -
4 hours ago, MinnDak said:
Yes O line is getting bigger. I meant more D side. Also the old O line coach was obsessed with being under sized/weight. A little more historical I should say. And the roster isn’t always accurate.
They slimmed down the first year he was here because they felt the talent wasn't were it needed to be so they thought they could play a little quicker to offset that. It failed and lasted one season before they worked on bulking them back up.
Agree on the D side. DE's need to be bigger. They also were very much in on some guys that would fit the NT position but ended up losing out on them.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, MinnDak said:
Agree. It’s obvious the D is too small. We refuse to play any 300 lb D or O lineman. If you tall and are skinny and look like an outside linebacker you play interior D line here. Orlando and Beach should never come off the field except to rest. Gotta rush the ball with at least 4 or the result is we make every quick QB look like Lamar Jackson. Our 280 to 320 lb recruits never see the field. Back to offense Bo Belquist isn’t too bad either and we have 4 backs that could run for any team including FBS.
4 of the 5 starting OL are 300lbs or more (the other is a 290 So) and 8 of the 12 on the 2-deep are 300 or more (anyone under that mark is a So or Fr and all are 285 or more). Not sure that argument holds water.
On the other hand, Beach is the only DL on the roster that is 300lbs or more. Not refusing 300lb DL isn't the problem, however not having any is a different story and one I'd agree with. Hoping the change in direction on the S&C side helps with that issue because it does definitely feel like UND's DE's are undersized.-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, UND-FB-FAN said:
So why were these unwarranted head coach extensions put into place? You’re using a problem (buy out cost) to justify a problem (unwarranted extensions-need a different HC); you realize that, right?
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
If UND can fund new multimillion dollar facilities, they can campaign to acquire buy out funds for an unwarranted extension and an ineffective coaching staff.
While I don't necessarily agree with it, I understand why the last extensions was done. That being said, I don't think it should have been two years and if needed to be, then it absolutely should have never been agreed to with the buy-out language that was included.
As an economist would say, that "problem" is a sunk cost and can't be changed, so there is not point in wasting time worrying about it. That isn't justifying anything, it is just the reality.
The other "problem" is what can be focused on. Conflating that with what's already done doesn't help anything.-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, fightingsioux4life said:
The results (or in this case, lack thereof) speak for themselves. No amount of sugar-coating can change that.
Who's sugar coating the current results, particularly the last two weeks? I haven't seen anyone defending it.
21 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:I just read a bunch of distraction text here. Sure, those are good things (facilities, Alston funds, etc), but results should be of priority. Results, as in head to head competition results, are the basis here. It shouldn’t be win at all costs, as sustainability is critical, but the University of North Dakota football program has only had sustainability in mediocrity, at this point, and that is where my criticism lies.
I acknowledged and agreed with a lot of what you said. The criticism is warranted and valid. I'm also understanding there currently isn't 7 figures lying around right now to make the fix you are advocating for. Unless that shows up somewhere, there won't be an immediate change. Call me crazy, but all the criticisms in the world aren't going to convince a sane person to walk away from well over half a million dollars doing something they are passionate about, barring something completely unforeseen, so that isn't a solution. Find me anyone on here who would make that choice.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:
I would argue we will have to agree to disagree. You’re gullible to lip service and friendliness. Results speak louder than words in my opinion, and I hold that in higher regard when forming opinions on UND and it’s leadership.
I saw them to be the first peer schools to step up and fund Alton Awards.
I know what they have had to do to get the new facilities funded and on line.
I have first hand spoken with the President and discussed the larger picture of athletics.Those are the actions and results I'm basing my opinion on. If you don't think any of that constitutes a massive shift from how athletics were previously supported, that is your choice. If you want to base your opinion on how quickly people are let go, also fine by me. But without the money to back those decisions, it isn't going to happen immediately. A persuasive argument on what the programs could be losing out on in revenue by letting things deteriorate too far might help you move the needle some, but hypothetical numbers won't move the needle as much as cold, hard cash.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, fightingsioux4life said:
So Armacost is running the athletic department through Chaves? I thought Presidents delegated these things.
In what industry does a subordinate not run large decisions, particularly ones that are very public and have significant financial implications, through the chain of command?
Conference realignment is decided at the President's level, not the AD level, with input from many channels (which heavily includes the AD).
University President's provide a ton of guidance for expectations to their most public facing departments (athletics).Not sure how any of that is controversial or confusing?
-
1
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:
Chaves is part of the problem.
He gets his marching orders and direction directly from the top.
He's not making significant decisions, which I would very much venture to guess include extending and/or firing coaches, without at least running it by his boss.
This defending what decisions have been made and there is definitely a portion of those decisions related to off-field performance as well as on-field performance. The former is in a very good spot. The latter is not up to the standards that I assume anyone is expecting. He also doesn't have an open checkbook to make knee-jerk decisions that cost mid-6 to 7 figures.Not arguing with the current frustration. It is justified. However there are realities in how it can be dealt with.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, UND-FB-FAN said:
My main gripe in all of this is I have no faith in UND leadership right now at present.
University President's are the ones who are involved in these major decisions, not athletic directors.
I would argue you aren't paying attention all that well if you don't think that the President and his second in charge aren't huge proponents of supporting athletics and understanding the "front porch theory" on why they are important. That being said, I have no clue what their stance is other than they see a huge importance of making sure we are aligned with our regional peers.Obviously none of that matters if a conference isn't interested. But, it probably doesn't hurt for University Presidents to have high-up connections to members of potential conferences you may be interested in though, at least have conversations.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, AJS said:
They want the central time zone for their FB only addition.
Why? Their value to any media contact is the late night games. There are already plenty of central and mountain time games to fill the gaps.
-
20 minutes ago, FargoBison said:
It isn't illogical at all and it is why Fenton won't play that game. There is no motivation for him to play that game either outside of a few schools that play a sport that many league members don't sponsor.
Not saying what he will or won't and should or shouldn't do, but Summit schools and Fenton have already "played that game" to certain degrees with the MVFC, MVC and Summit making sure schools there have homes for Olympic sports.
And since everything is speculation right now, with Patty V retiring, it isn't out of the realm of possibilities that the Summit is eying taking over handling the MVFC. It would definitely help strengthen the brand for the conference and would have minimal effect on the "affiliate members". I know the idea has been discussed before.I'm sure Fargo's appetite to help support the move by choosing twice not to pay to renovate the Fargodome won't go unnoticed when looking at funding options.
-
2 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:
UND has had a strong academic and research foundation for quite awhile. When do you think it will "work its way into the athletic on-field performance"? Is that something that will happen organically?
I don't have the answer. If I did, I probably by charging a hell of a lot of money as a consultant.
The University has been able to put more support into athletics the last few years after actually taking on an unsustainable and broken budget and actually making some hard decisions to get to the spot they are in. -
29 minutes ago, andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!! said:
It would be nice to see UND leading on something related to athletics for a change. UND should be embarrassed with the way they have ceded the state of ND to NDSU. Its unacceptable in my opinion. The frustrations are numerous- from the inability to win in a variety of sports to the poor planning in the athletic department over the years to always being behind and on and on and on.
The University as a whole is in one of the strongest positions it has ever been in. That needs to continue to work its way into the athletic on-field performance.
Don't think you can say the former about any other research institution in the state.
-
On 11/3/2024 at 4:44 PM, 90siouxfan said:
unless they are your ramblings?
Arguing against strawmen is a different category I guess.
-
2 hours ago, fightingsioux4life said:
Unless there is some plucky little QB starting at a small high school in North Dakota that gets the coaching staff's attention.
Either you trust the staff (coordinators, position coaches) feels they are putting the players that give the team the best chance to win or you don't.
Personally I'd prefer they ignore pedigree, recruiting rankings, where players are from and scholarship status and instead focus on who is actually performing and executing the best in practice and during games.-
2
-
1
-
-
57 minutes ago, geaux_sioux said:
It was dumb and unnecessary to have him anything but under center.
They must have had some sort of plan with two DL in front of him, must have thought they would need to clear out more bodies than normal?
But when the DE's get around the corners as fast as they did while Q is looking where to go, it is a bit of a calculated risk that almost blew up.
Assuming there was a reason they went away from the tried and true that pretty much works every time but no clue what that might be.-
2
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, gundy1124 said:
Must see TV!!
Something, something, ESPN2, something, something, probably millions of viewers...
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, gfhockey said:
Rumor is Logan on last year of contract too?
It was stated by Tom Miller in the article he wrote about it. 2 year extension in 2022.
-
On 10/19/2024 at 2:44 PM, Parkers Pros said:
Any Recruits at the game today?
There was around 50.
-
1 hour ago, UND-FB-FAN said:
Right now, it seems, the entire football program and athletic department is placing all the weight of their decisions on the new facilities. If the new facilities don’t lead to substantial differences in the type of recruit UND football attracts, and develops, then we will be right back to where we are now - GET DIFFERENT COACHES/LEADERS.
You don't think a change in S&C coach is a significant change in trying to find ways for improvement and something specifically that isn't "placing all the weight of their decisions on the new facilities"?
-
1
-
2024 UND Football
in Football
Posted
Which part of I didn't agree with the timing of the extension and I definitely was against the buy-out language that was in it are you struggling to understand?
What time frame are you considering "a mess"? The program is clearly in a better spot than when he took it over. There have been ups and downs, but the baseline is a much better spot. Does that mean it is where I want it to be? No. The baseline and results should be more than they are.
I don't know how to help you understand that explaining that communicating with decision makers is more effective than anonymously posting the same things over and over (and over and over) again, even if you don't get the results you want every time. And frankly, that's a good thing. You want to see "a mess"? Listening to every person with an opinion and going with their whims would have any athletic department millions in the hole in buyouts and a minimal pool to replace the person everyone wants fired the second there is any adversity. There is a happy medium to that though.
Again, just so you understand, I'm not remotely OK with how this season has progressed, but it isn't a snap your fingers and everything is fine situation. And it was compounded with an extension with, at the moment, a prohibitive buyout. That's where we are right now. Can't undo it, so figuring out how to proceed from here, whether its raise funds or figure out a way to improve, is what needs to be solved.