jdub27

Do you feel better now?

I think we're on the same page, athletics is the proverbial "front-door" to the University, spend time and money on promoting it across the board (there should be a little extra of both with the nickname saga winding down). In no way am I saying that should fans be coming up with the main marketing ideas/themes/etc. My point is more related to feedback on what they are doing or could tweak/improve. Wasn't there quite a few people who e-mailed them a few years ago to bring back yard signs and they've continued to release them ever since? Again, small but simple example and much more effective than complaining on a message board (though we all know that an eye is kept on this board by multiple people within UND and athletics). As for the NDSU spring game, that's a combination of demand from winning and NBC willing to spend the resources on something they are maybe breaking even on. I do know that there were people contacting both NDSU and NBC wanting it shown. Was it ultimate decider of it getting done? Doubtful, but guessing it didn't hurt.

Without even taking into consideration the huge difference in FargoU folks here vs. UND people on bisonville the last time I read the collective group think-only, the actual amusing thing is the NDSU trolls who spend time to sign up and post on a UND site trying to continuously claim that UND isn't relevant and not seeing the irony in what they are doing.

He was trying to be a prick about it. I'll just lay his argument out since it is obvious where he's going: All student have to pay the activity fees regardless, yet if students want to go to men's hockey games they have to pay even more. It is "unfair" to those who don't buy the tickets, since they are still contributing to fund athletics but not getting the perk of men's hockey games. It's a dumb argument but it is the one he's trying to make. There is a premium on men's hockey tickets, it is what it is and it has been that way since the new REA opened up. However, even excluding men's hockey, UND still offers more athletic events for students to attend free of charge compared to NDSU. Considering NDSU athletics was shot down hard on their attempt to raise student fees (0 for, 7 against, 2 abstaining, 1 absent), I wouldn't be surprised if something similar happened with football tickets in Fargo.

Agree across the board. My point all along has been that I know the athletic/marketing department is continuously trying to improve and they know there has been deficiencies. If people have ideas, pass them on. They have been very receptive in the past to ideas from outside sources on what is working or what can be improved since those are the people they are trying to reach. I've done it in the past and will do so in the future. Somehow that equates to being content with the status quo yet complaining on a message board and not offering any input to the people who are responsible for making improvements is supposedly the correct way to go about getting change. It's not the job or responsibility of anyone here, but we all want UND to continue to succeed. Taking a little ownership in helping that out, when many are already doing so monetarily, is really easy to do and can go a long way. A great example is @UNDColorado asking if the spring game will be webcast, letting them know there is interest in people outside the region seeing it. All it took was a simple tweet.

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.