jdub27

That makes zero sense. The athletic department has a budget deficit and has to make further cuts along with the rest of the school. UND has too many sports and is spread to thin. Regardless of what they do, sports were going to be cut because of the budget issue (and it should have been done probably a decade ago). A self-respecting president, regardless of division, will give his school the best chance to succeed, which is what Kennedy's stated goal is and why sports are being cut. There are plenty of schools at the FCS level and below that have more status than a ton of FBS schools. Being in makeshift WAC conference with a bunch of schools no one has heard of doesn't automatically earn you more prestige than being in the Big Sky.

Are you suggesting they don't do the upgrades? Then you are in a scenario where either UND has to pay for them now or in the future when they take over the building and it is in a run-down shape. Like I said, I believe it is set up to be very beneficial to UND in the long-run at the expense of some short-term pain.

They already pull over 53% of their athletic budget from school/student subsidies. I'd be willing to wager it is not.

Guessing it is that the schedule is finalized they got another (hopefully) home game. Think he purposely didn't say it was a big announcement?

Those lots are already privately owned.

Locker room renovations were paid for with private donations. Things like the new boards in the hockey arena and the new video boards in the Betty are paid for with excess operating funds. Curious which of the entities you are using to come up with your retained earnings numbers. Retained earnings doesn't necessarily mean cash available to do with as you please. And though I'm not sure where it is coming from, having a replacement reserve fund of at least that size is probably accurate if not a bit low due to the possible costs of replacing certain elements of the building. Roughly $2.5 million remaining. Guessing it will be paid off in around 5 more years.

If you would have read my next sentence, I addressed that exact point, there needs to be a balance. There are 5+ empty lots within a block of that location. There is a need for more office space downtown. They are offering incentives to grow the tax base and will likely see a higher value building in the long run because of it. I don't always agree with the policies but I understand the theory behind them.

There were three other proposals, this was the one chosen though it has not been approved. Guessing the incentives are in line with previous ones given out downtown/in the renaissance zone. And the city is currently seeing zero revenue and probably paying for upkeep. Obviously there needs to be a balance with some green space, but there is a need for office space downtown.

I think there are a lot of reasons for it, the main on being that our budget now is a lot bigger than it was 15 years ago. I believe that in the long run it will very much payoff for UND once they have full ownership. Until then, they will indirectly continue to contribute towards its upkeep/upgrades. Not saying there aren't some things that can't be improved with the relationship and how some things are handled and my thought was the IAC committee would come across some of those. We will see.

DuPont Court at the Scheels Center inside the Sanford Health Athletic Complex. I feel like they forgot to put another sponsor logo on the court to complete the NASCAR look. Not logistically possible for the Betty to have a center-hung scoreboard due to multi-use, but that is pretty nice looking despite that it looks to be a bit too low in the picture.

You're assuming that those are hard costs/real money. I would bet that isn't necessarily the case, however they are still "costs" that need to be appropriated somewhere. On top of that, money UND does pay is indirectly helping funding the Betty and some of the improvements to the REA. It is also doesn't take into account the money that flows back to UND from the REA Foundation. It is a strange and complex relationship with a lot of moving parts, though I believe set up to be in the best interest of UND in the long run. UND should see a lot of benefit from some things that may look a little off now in about 14 years or so.

As someone who was at both games, your last statement would be an early front-runner for a preposterous statement tournament. There was only one Sioux Forever chant at the football game (at least that had anything behind it), and it was at the very end. There were multiple Sioux chants at the hockey game with most, but not all, of them coming from/starting in the student section. I will say that it was amusing to watch people become so conflicted during the hockey game due to how much often they used the Fighting Hawks during the game and they didn't have enough time to figure out whether to boo or cheer. I was very impressed with how much both the logo and name were incorporated during the game.

There is an NCAA limit on the cost of them so the total bill isn't as much as you'd think. Regardless, it was very generous of the Engelstad's to cover the cost.

Are people really surprised the o-line struggles at times when they are replacing 4 starters and an above average blocker at tight end/fullback? Possibly the reason the tight ends aren't as involved because they are needed to help block. Are people really surprised that the passing game is simplified and struggles a bit when there is no one to take the top off, the teams two best receivers have played a combined two quarters and they are relying heavily on two true freshman (who are doing great given the circumstances but need to improve on downfield blocking and continue to learn the position at the college level, which they will)? I agree that it is frustrating at times, has drove me nuts multiple times and there is tons of room for improvement but a little perspective explains some of the issues. Bubba's system is for UND's offense to compliment the defense. That doesn't mean they shouldn't carry their own weight, which they have failed to do plenty this year, but it is set up to be a low risk system and shorten the game. I'm more disappointed about some of the penalties than anything (regardless of questionable reffing). Margin for error isn't big enough for this team to be continously shooting themselves in the foot.

You should alternate with some LaBatt's.

That is a possibility but I believe 2019 is the only 12 game season until 2024 and 2025, so they are pretty limited on options if so. Where exactly did you get that St. Peter was the one that approached NDSU? If it's from the article, that is a pretty big stretch from St. Peter saying that Target Field is always looking to host events, which is no secret. Football has been talked about for years there. No sour grapes on my part, I've been to a handful of gimmick some are more fun than others. Just general amusement in what appears to be another scheduling "necessity" possibly being tossed aside along with them looking at doing it in a baseball stadium when there is a beautiful brand new football stadium right there.

I would guess they would make the monetary side work but how are they going to give up a home game for this? I thought we were told that their fans and the Fargo community required 6 regular session home games per year? Check off another excuse as BS. Not to mention they are looking at a baseball stadium when there is a shiny brand new football stadium just across downtown. Must not have as much faith in the fan base as some of their fans.

There is a reason that Dave St. Peter is listed under the Administration and not Baseball Operations on the Twins website. His whole career has been on the operations side (Pro Shop Manager, Corporate Communications and Business Affairs). He is not responsible for the baseball side of the organization and if it was, with his background I'm not sure how it would make any sense that he would be. I'm sorry if his title is too confusing for you to comprehend but blaming him for that seems odd. If he was responsible for the baseball side, he'd be the General Manager, no different than most other franchises. That is the person who is in charge of the baseball side of organizations.

I see what you did there, whether intentionally or not. That would sure make it tough for Mr. King to criticize them given his background.

What happened at Quinnipiac is the reason that schools actually look into the incidents instead of act now, ask questions later: If the people with mob mentality would have had their way, the girl in the picture would have been expelled when she had nothing to do with the picture short of wearing a mud mask. But by then they would have had their pound of flesh and moved on, so it wouldn't have mattered.

From all appearances? I can think of a handful of other explanations that are just as plausible but they won't make as many headlines. If it was as open and shut as you claim, the University wouldn't spend time looking into it. If what you said is actually what happened, then the students who did it deserve whatever punishment they get. If it was a joke between friends gone awry and turned into something it wasn't because of social media, then I would have a different stance on it.

If it performs as well as the old app used to, I'm happy they finally got it done (a year late but I digress).

Indeed. Reading some of the tweets were absolutely baffling. People calling for immediate justice without looking into it, because that doesn't have the possibility of making it worse... The mob mentality is why they actually had to clarify that no student athletes were involved. There were people Twitter-raging that UND hadn't done anything about it last night even though they didn't find out until 10:45pm. No clue if it was as blatantly bad as it may have seemed or if it was friends joking around but it plays terrible to the public and at least one, if not all three, of those students had an incredible lapse in judgement and will face some pretty harsh consequences.

No disagreements. Numbers always amuse me, same things can be used to tell multiple stories and prove opposite points. Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics. To the point, doubt anyone would disagree that they need to add a few more passes to the 1st down call sheet. Not the home run type, just the safe 4-8 yard variety. And preferably no cross field 10 yard outs!

To be fair, if you are going to take out one big running play, it would be fair to take out the outlier on the pass side, which was the first play of the game. Meaning that after the first play of the game, the 5 passes on first down netted 13 yards, which is a dismal 2.6 yard average (mainly due to 3 of remaining 5 being incomplete). I do think that they need to work in some more play action on first down especially with the tight end leaking to the middle of the field or just out into the flats because I'm pretty sure it will be open. To your point, no reason they shouldn't be well above 50% and the numbers will improve with that and conversely should help stop teams from selling out on the run.