jdub27

Outside of Purpur, not really a big fan of the possible candidates on Tom's list. And he is probably a long shot with two kids in high school, though he did apply when the President's job opened up...

At this point, I'm not really sure what the difference is. He wasn't going to be around much longer, if the President was the one who thought it was a the right time for a new AD, then so be it and he did it in the proper way. If Faison felt he was ready to retire, being 67, dealing with some family health issues and able to see his grandkids more, good for him. Either way, he has left a pretty clean slate for someone new to step in: Conference and nickname issues are cleared up, budget should be in good shape, coaches contracts are fairly settled. I'd rather focus on making sure the next hire is the right person for the job.

Because he has friends that didn't get paid for work they supposedly did for UND (even though no one else has ever heard a peep about it) or something like that.

The coaches made their decision based off what they had seen in practice up to this point, that's literally all they have had to go off of. My guess is there will be a change in their decision after having some game film to watch.

Oops. Yes.

Just spitballing but it looks like Iowa has a 2021 opening.

Probably should have left it that way. We are in a whole lot of trouble if that is somehow something that is considered as a qualification let alone requirement.

I mean, he started his job in May, 2008. The NCAA settlement agreement was signed October, 2007 and it was over long before that. I think you are completely underestimating the whole issue if you think he could have done in his short time he was here before the nickname was done. This was an issue that people had decades to get resolved and didn't.

Anyone in a position like that has pluses and minuses. I think his pluses are pretty impressive, even though 100% of each one can't be directly attributed to him: Transitioned to Division 1, which has had its ups and downs Got UND into the Big Sky when the only other option available would have killed football Spent a few years and finally negotiated UND into the Summit/MVFC, bringing down travel expenses and getting natural rivals back on the schedule permanently Created the NCHC, which immediately became the premier hockey conference in the nation, when it was obvious the WCHA was going to be controlled by schools that were not "like-minded" as UND Oversaw a large portion of the fundraising and completion of the HPC Immediately replaced a coach who left for the NHL with no disturbance in the program that currently brings in the most money for UND Instituted full cost of attendance for all scholarship athletes to ensure programs remained competitive Cut loose the anchor that was women's hockey Coaching hires have largely been great Did all of this while dealing with the disaster known as the nickname issue Again, there are definitely some negatives. The biggest one I have is process of replacing the football coach; appears to have settled on the right guy, but the timeline was unacceptable. Some people say he isn't personable enough, I can't really speak to that as I haven't really had that experience. Budget cuts probably could have been handled differently if women's hockey and corresponding cuts would have been done initially, preventing round 2, but tough to know depending on the information that was available at the time. Maybe fundraising, maybe not? AD obviously plays a part in it, but is not their main job, there are people who's sole job is to do that. Neither list is all inclusive but a pretty decent rundown.

On top of that, he's 67 and there have been health issues his family has dealt with. Timing with conference issues finally being settled and nickname issue put to bed, actually seems like a natural break point to give a new AD a clean slate regardless of how the decision was come to.

It very well could lead to that, actually would be pretty surprised if it didn't.

What would ever give you that idea? Of course, low hanging fruit to drives clicks and interest without having to do much work. Not meant as a knock on him either, just common sense. He does amazing work on his hockey coverage.

And that doesn't even count Connor O'Brien. Or Noah Larson, who is obviously unproven but would have played had he been healthy.

No they don't and you have zero objective rankings to show NDSU having a better resume. Two or one isn't a resume, they are data points on a body of work. But it's OK, NDSU's resume has already started to get better now that they are done playing teams in the bottom 20% of Division 1 in 4 of their first 5 games. Maybe they will even leapfrog USD in individual Sagarin rankings for the season so next time you bring it up, you can use it as a winning argument instead of a losing one.

Yes, because the polls your citing have shown to be really accurate and very flexible to move off their initial rankings. The one that is typically the most accurate, AGS, has WIU ahead of EWU (actually WIU, EWU, YSU at 7,8,9). It's also convenient how you keep including best two wins instead of three, which allows you to exclude USD's FBS win. Understandable since that would require you to add in NDSU's third best win, which is Missouri State and that doesn't even come close to helping your case.

Better than your "eye test". A resume is a complete body of work. USD's is better than NDSU's to date. There are different levels of "bad teams". Thinking that Bowling Green is near the same level as Missouri State (both team's 3rd best win) is ridiculous. UND blew out Missouri State. Hell, UND would be 4-2 with NDSU's schedule and they are in the bottom half of USD's SOS.

You are probably right on the record and you would finally be right on the resume part as well. That's the point.

So in order to make your point, you have to put USD's second best win against NDSU's top win and then claim that a ~12 point difference is actually a wash. No wonder you don't have a clue.

Considering the "bad" teams they have beaten aren't as bad as the "bad" teams NDSU has beaten, then yes, they should. Knowing that, I'm not sure how you can objectively say that NDSU has a better resume. This adjusts for where the game was. The only comparison NDSU wins is the first one by half a point. USD NDSU @WIU = @YSU (YSU by 0.5) YSU > @EWU (YSU by 10.2) @BGU > MSU (BGU by 21.9) @UND > @ISU (UND by 11.2) ISU > RMU (ISU by 7.4) Drake > MVSU (Drake by 16.8)

They get more credit for beating poor teams even though they have a harder schedule? Seriously, step back and be objective. USD has played a harder schedule and to this point has a better resume. It's OK to admit. This year only SOS: USD - #160 (49.93) NDSU - #230 (36.66) USD's schedule is even harder when looking at that. Winning at YSU and WIU is basically a wash. Beating YSU is still better than winning at EWU. Beating Bowling Green is still significantly better than Missouri State. Advantage USD. I'm not saying that USD is going to beat NDSU. The point was made that they have a better resume to date and you took exception with it based on nothing but your eye test.

You're completely ignoring some other factors, including bias from previous seasons. By your "eye test" you claim NDSU has better wins but there are no objective numbers that bear that out. I also showed where it places USD ahead of NDSU using this season's results only, so how do you explain that outside of leaning on human polls and voters who slot vote and won't move NDSU down unless they lose.....?

There's some truth in this....

Ah, now I get how you're going to get around it. I brought up Sagarin because it's an objective measure of SOS, which shows USD with the same record as NDSU but a harder schedule. You are the one who brought individual rankings into it, which I then showed that rankings that only go off of this season have USD as above NDSU. Remember, you're the one who made the claim that NDSU has a better resume but I've yet to see an objective measure that proves that.....

You're right, Sagarin is currently assigning roughly 2.07/2.20 points for home field advantage this year. Since YSU is USD's second best win, you need to compare them correctly: Winning @WIU is better than winning @YSU (both team's best win) and beating YSU at home is better than winning @EWU (both team's second best win). Advantage USD. When are you going to acknowledge the part where the rankings that only take into account this season show USD as better than NDSU?

I see you not surprisingly completely ignored my 2nd point, but you made up for it by making things up with your last sentence... Best two wins on NDSU's schedule: YSU - 85 (64.03)EWU - 117 (57.71) Best two wins on USD's schedule: WIU - 48 (64.71)YSU - 85 (64.03) USD's third and fourth wins are also better than NDSU's third. But I digress.