jdub27

I get wanting your best player to take the last shot but if Hooker is going to take that, it needs to be from the elbow where he doesn't miss. Still think Drick was the best option tonight, they had no answer for him short of putting him on the line.

UNC scores, UND ball with 10 seconds left after a timeout. Give it to Drick, he's dominating down low.

UND goes up 1 with 33 seconds left. Will have a couple seconds if UNC scores

No mention of his lime green sneakers??

These announcers make a guy long for NAU's guys. Need to keep UNC from getting hot, UND definitely the better team.

You noticed that as well? Strange since he's been so vocal about this. It's not that the Foundation is paying for it, it's that he intentionally misrepresented it after asking them to cover the tab.

I feel like we've seen this story before...

I would put the caveat out there that they actually have pretty good wings, especially when they are on happy hour pricing.

You're off to a good start by asking for some guidance or at least making a good first impression. Input from the students/alumni/fans will be key but none of them will want the same thing (good luck). The design will likely be not well-received initially but this is not to be taken personal, it is just a truth of the situation, unless of course it is identical to the Fighting Sioux logo which would be the absolutely only thing that would appease a portion of the fanbase. We are used to something unique and while it will be hard to come up with something like that with a fairly generic nickname, it needs to be "different" but please not in a cartoon-like way. Finding a very subtle way to tie in any portion of the old logo(s) would help you cause but not to a degree where it is blatant (like a headdress on a bird). UND is the flagship school of the state, classic is important, not something that is flashy or modern and is going to be feel outdated in a few years. As it was already stated, have thick skin. This is not a project for someone who is unable to take some serious criticism, which will be inevitable regardless of how good or bad the design turns out.

A) I would guess there is a fair amount of schadenfreude after hearing how NDSU's athletic department is flush with cash is a big part of it topped off by the request coming 2 years into a 5 year agreement and the lack of details making it all the more cringe-worthy. And you're incorrect, the students will not be voting on it, the Student Fee Advisory Board makes a recommendation to Bresciani on whether it should be approved or not. There is not a student vote. B) Are they really "getting" more money or is it supplementing a different area that is declining for an unknown reason? Are people really upset or just enjoying the show? If the increase is for travel/supplies/equipment as stated (which is absurd that it would almost triple out of nowhere), then I don't see anything to get upset about other than NDSU being really poor at budgeting and making projections. C) Lying might be a strong word but at best they are being less than forthcoming and that is not speculation, that is directly from NDSU students (one who was on the board for the 5 year approval just 2 years ago) who grilled the athletic representatives who continued to provide vague answers.

Point 1: I won't argue that, however it is no different that the BS spewed on bisonville about anything UND. We can agree it is what it is. Point 2: Your opinions (which are fine to have) don't seem to have a solid grasp of what the "plans" actually are or at least you haven't shared a concrete detail on them if you do. How did they shortchange themselves $1.5 million after only 2 years, which is almost 8% of their budget? They have been in the same conferences for almost a decade now and all of the sudden travel costs are almost tripling? That doesn't raise any red flags to you? Of course they are free to ask for more money whenever they want, but by choosing not to wait the 5 years and coming back after only 2, they opened themselves up to every bit of criticism they are getting.

It seems more like you continue to deflect (or muddy the waters) by bringing other schools into it. The rest of us are discussing why NDSU athletics suddenly needs an extra $1.5million from their students (over doubling what they are already contributing) just 2 years into a 5 year agreement with little information provided to the students on why the money is needed. Not to mention it is happening just a few months after they added $700K to their expenses by announcing FCOA. That has absolutely nothing to do with any other schools yet you keep bringing them into it. Any mention of a different school and what they do has zero to do with what NDSU is doing.

It didn't answer any of the questions the first time, not sure why you thought it might this time?

What's strange is that there is no publicly known or logical reason travel costs would almost triple out of nowhere. Maybe they are going to soon need the extra money to fly their football team to conference games in places like Boone, Statesboro, Troy, Jonesboro, etc...?

They were, but they won't be. NDSU's student fees will also make up a larger percent of their athletic budget than at UND after the increase. Not to mention NDSU already costs more to attend than UND. The real take away is that there is people getting some enjoyment out of watching a bunch of FargoU supporters with zero answers to relevant questions just a few months after watching them pound their chest about having an athletic department that is supposedly flush with cash that all of the sudden needs to over double the amount they are getting from their students ($1.4million increased to $2.9-3.0million). But don't feel bad that you don't have answers, the athletic representatives really didn't either. As for low hanging fruit, taking money from the student body "just because" is an absolutely terrible reason for increasing fees, not to mention when they are trying to do it 2 years into a 5 year agreement. It is the (lack of) reasoning and the timing that is the problem, not what they are actually doing.

Correct. I had fixed it my original post but after it got quoted a few times. Not sure how I got that confused because I literally had to click on UMass-Lowell to pull up the logos.

In their defense, it doesn't look like they use those, they actually ended up using this one: Which are better choices than the previous ones or these two....

Oh really? Well what if I showed you this version of it?

Which ever firm is hired is paid as an outside contractor doing "work for hire" and all rights, interests, etc are transferred to UND. I'd assume UND is free to come up with alternate logos in any manner they want in the future. The scope is pretty much all encompassing. Start from scratch and come up with everything. The RFP states:

That was kind of the all-around opinions I formed as well. If I had a vote, it would go to SME. Here's an example of Phoenix's interpretation of a hawk for UL-Monroe UMass-Lowell (Riverhawks)

Three finalists announced: Summit Athletics Media SME Inc Phoenix Design Works Fairly impressive portfolios. SME did the Big Sky and NAU rebranding among other things. Phoenix Design does a ton of college work. Summit seems to handle more specific events/things but do have a variety in their portfolio.

I've heard similar and early results are trending that way. Putting a lot of eggs in the basket of next year's class bringing in 7 scholarship players.

Noah Wanzek (6'4"-200) per SFI.

How is someone supposed to answer something that has never been presented as an option by anyone related to UND. Let's try this: What happens when NDSU comes back to ask for more student money again in two years? Since you can't seem to differentiate between discussing something that has actually happened (NDSU athletics asking for students to over double their fees just 2 years into a 5 year agreement) and something that not a single soul has mentioned to this point (UND changing their student fees), I guess it is fair to just speculate NDSU will keep taking more money from students every two years because it is apparent that they can't make a budget or prepare accurate projections.

I like UND's chances when the other team is reliant on their guards to score with the caveat that UND has been giving up a fair amount of decent shots or better from 3-point, however the other teams haven't been converting which is a partial credit to UND players closing on the shooter.