jdub27

My understanding is that UND's FCOA will be slightly higher than NDSU's but not much ($3,600-$3,800 I think). There was some issues with the formulas as they were previously presented but it was never looked into at the time as it wasn't really a relevant number used for much of anything (at least in terms of athletics). Well, UND was the first area school to state they would be offering FCOA in sports where their competitors were (and corresponding offerings on the women's side). Now that NDSU has made an announcement to do it across the board, UND will likely have to re-adjust their strategy as other competitors have changed the landscape.

One thing to take into account is that in NDSU's favor is their smaller offering of sports, particularly on the women's side. If my counting is accurate and all sports were fully funded at both schools (they currently are not), NDSU would offer approximately 191.7 scholarships compared to UND's 254.2. UND's offerings are more in line with peer and regional schools, even excluding hockey, but at some point, a uncomfortable conversation may have to take place.

Ah yes. Knew I was missing something.

Personal opinion only, but I'd argue it noticeably has already. That includes all sports I've attended in the last year or two (MH, WH, VB, MBB, WBB and FB).

I didn't think it was one of the finalists, was there an announcement I missed?

Don't schools have to approve all licensed gear? Possibility it isn't officially licensed I guess.

I'd counter that Stanford is a bastion for elitist academia nuts.

Its not, quit trying drag a kid's name through the mud even if you're only implying it might be.

Or something crazy like being hypocritical and having double standards on what is and isn't acceptable? The NCAA doesn't care and their members gave them that power. Until the P5 takes their ball and moves on, the NCAA is going to do what it wants. Where else are student athletes going to go? Fact of the matter is, the NCAA won't tell UND fans what they can and can't do. What they may and very will likely do (and have already alluded to) is tell them about consequences that will come from them acting as if the Fighting Sioux is still the nickname of the school (and UND is complicit in the deal by selecting "no nickname"). Laying out consequences for doing something is not the same as telling someone what they can and can't do. Don't believe it? It is exact same play they used to get UND to retire the Fighting Sioux nickname, UND was not forced by the NCAA to do so.

That's the argument you're going to go with? They aren't preventing anyone from doing anything, however when you are a member of a private club, you are subject to their rules.

The first one. The second one is busy selling rivalry shirts for a rivalry that I'm told doesn't exist anymore. Actually happened to see a Fargo U fan in Fargo wearing one (rivalry shirt) a few weeks ago in Fargo and chuckled to myself.

Maybe but he's coming off a major injury and no clue if he's even back to 100% yet.

Surprised not to see DaQuan Baker not on the 2-deep.

Even though it might not seem like it all the time, Rugby plays 11 man football at the A level, though not sure when the moved down from the AA level.

Truth is, if Mollberg (and Bartels) wouldn't have been hurt, Studsrud would be a RFr instead of a Sophomore and have no game experience. If that was the situation, I don't think he's in the conversation for starting this year.

You sound like the people who said the NCCA would never be able to force coerce UND to retire the Fighting Sioux nickname. How'd that turn out? They have already stated that it very well could end with UND facing sanctions and yet you're still going to go with it will never happen? Something about "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it" or something like that...?

I think you are going to be pretty close, pretty much exactly what I was thinking. I really have no guesses on KR/PR, just don't want to see Reyes on there.

Jim can change your username for you at your request

Didn't mean it as a criticism, I know those guys would be out there if they could.

A)Huh? What would be the point of that? B)Anyone can start one, but if past efforts are any indication, not sure why they would.

Great choices and not much surprise in the group.

I agree, was surprised it wasn't the first one done. But since it wasn't, had to add it.

Dickey's and Sweeto Burrito were both in buildings that have historically struggled because of location and access. Quiznos is on a closing spree across the nation and was surpassed by pretty much every sandwich shop in town. Unfortunate, but I wouldn't put too much stock into any of those.

Ironic because that is also roughly the multiple the actual attendance would have needed to reach thousands...