jdub27

Unfortunately it is going to take more than one game (or a couple games) to get the casual fan back. UND can market until they are green in the face, winning games and making the playoffs will be the biggest driver behind increasing attendance. That doesn't mean they have a free pass and shouldn't put forth any effort into doing what they can to help attract the casual fan, but the product on the field is the tool that will be the main driver.

What schools do people care about in the Summit/MVFC? NDSU and maybe the South Dakota schools? Both conferences have more than their share of what can be considered undesirables.

Second release, they did a small one with the original announcement (August, 2013). I believe it was one shirt and had a very limited run. Looks to be a lot of the same confusion though.

We'll have to disagree on that. The tribes have zero legal standing and only path to ownership of the marks is if UND voluntarily turned them over. Why would UND have a need for a defense to protect them in that situation? The concern isn't that they would have to turn them over to the tribes if they don't use them, it is that UND would lose ownership and the marketplace would become a free-for-all. UND needs to use the marks fore the sole reason of protecting its ownership of them. You keep saying happy family. I'd argue that there wasn't much happiness within UND (and many stakeholders) due to the countless money, time allocated and other resources spent on the situation, detracting from UND's ability to better itself.

Nowhere did I say it was your or anyone else's job to do the marketing for UND. I am simply stating that if people have specific ideas or are going to complain about something they don't like, it makes a lot more sense to do so and pass it on to the right people in hopes of changing something, especially when in the past, they have been very receptive to that input. I'm confused on your comment about being content though. That doesn't make sense that I would be content if I'm taking time to pass on ideas that I think could lead to improvements? That seems to be the exact opposite of being content with everything as is. I guess I disagree with the approach of complaining/venting on a message board because to me, that seems to be the approach that shows very little in terms of wanting to change the status quo. Since you brought it up, what is the approach that you agree with? Secondly, I too am just commenting on what I am seeing. I know that the athletic department is continuously trying to find ways to better promote the other sports, but I'm guessing that job is a lot easier and more effective when they get input from the people the marketing is supposed to be reaching.

Well other than being fairly obvious, Schafer specifically stated that in the article. "I don't see it as some kind of long process because usage isn't defined," Schafer said. "We can define it any way we want, we just have to make sure we have a reasonable chance at legal defense."

E-mail ideas to the marketing staff (Jason Namanny, Alex Kroke) if you have them. From experience, they are very receptive and continuously looking for input from the fans to see what they want and how they think they can make the experience better. Being proactive and providing input is much more helpful than holding your breath.

Or they do a release now and the shelves are clear of Dacotah Legacy Collection items before the new logo and merchandise is released. If they felt they needed to do another release soon, it makes sense to do it a handful of months before the new brand is released rather than the same time or right after.

Because the law is very vague, I think UND previously felt fine doing occasional releases with no actual policy, not binding themselves to something when they didn't have to. However I believe there were some third parties who started questioning usage which is why I assume they did a much larger/broader release this time (when compared to the first one) and also the reason they are now coming up with a defined policy, making it is easier to defend if needed.

Hopefully how they handle surveys isn't where some student athletes learned how to handle petitions...

Bad wording on my part. Just wanted to make it clear that UND didn't have any more to do with the event than any other local schools/coaches. The only reference I saw to UND anywhere was a screenshot of the Alerus Center's website with the event details that has the UND Football logo up in the corner (which I guess should be a credit to the Alerus Center for prominently displaying that on all of their pages now). Bad deal around. Very unfortunate situation for the athletes and their families who spent time and money on what they thought would be an investment for their future.

The only thing UND would have to do with it is that they (along with a lot of others) do some scouting at the event. Curious if they know their logo is being used. Agreed that any affiliation, even if just perceived, isn't ideal.

Not even sure he's viewed as the back-up at this point in the season, especially with approximately 5 minutes of game time that came in an exhibtion. He didn't make the trip to Denver, Hrynkiw traveled as the #2. Doesn't meant he couldn't get a shot but gives you an idea of what the staff is thinking.

There was something on it on WDAY/Z's 10pm telecast last night but that was the only mention I've seen of it.

Link?

You forgot the couple cans of spray paint they used. No wonder you don't understand it.

Which is the rough equivalent to third best in the nation.

Here are UND's road losses this year: Wisconsin - Down by 13 at half, first game of the year FGCU - Decided to quit scoring the last 10 minutes, 3rd game of the year Kansas State - Down 3 at half, KSU pulled away at the beginning of the 2nd half Weber - Down by 12 at half, 6 was the smallest lead in the 2nd half UNC - Largest lead was 4 So for your comment/observations applies to a total of 4 games excluding last night (against a team that is lights out at home), one of which was against a B1G team, another against Big12 team, and third being a team UND had never previously beat until a last week. Guess I just don't see what you're seeing unless it is that UND getting behind better teams makes its harder to win, but that seems like common sense for any team, not UND specific. Winning on the road is tough to do for most teams. Winning on the road is even harder to do when you get down by a few scores. UND could have let last night really snowball out of control and it didn't, this team hopefully learning how to win close games whether it be on the road or at home and I haven't seen anything that looks like lack of effort, regardless of the score (outside of maybe UNI).

Excellent stuff, thank you for posting. I liked SME's proposal. Interesting that the "local" candidate had a cost 3x that of the winner and that is without them having to add any travel expenses.

UND was down 10 to Bradley in the second half and came back to win. I think this team is still learning how to react to different situations and I can say that I haven't seen any sort of "quit" from them even when they go down. Can't say I agree with your assessment.

Apparently you do since you took the time to respond nonsensically to it. And again, if the teams you play in the playoffs are irrelevant, why all the conspiracy theory stuff coming out of Fargo and the MVFC fan bases on how the bracket was set up?

Are you confused on how regionalization applies in the playoffs? If you actually understood it, you wouldn't be confused on why what he said is pretty spot on. Your comment is a good example of why FargoU and MVFC fans made themselves look silly throwing temper tantrums when the brackets were announced.

Big Sky TV only. They are really good up keeping the schedule on UNDSports.com up-to-date on how games are accessible and where they will be shown.

I bet even they would be in awe with some of the conspiracy theories that have come out of the nickname saga.

Wonder if there isn't some sort of "checkpoint" so to speak coming up on when they need to release the next batch of merchandise to protect the trademarks and figure it makes more sense to do it right now rather than at the same time or shortly after the new logo comes out.