jdub27

You can't really believe this can you? Because its harder? Come on. Look at the levels that the P5 and G5 schools to do some of the things they do. You think a survey is really that big of a barrier for them to not squeeze a few more dollars out of non-revenue programs if they were able to? Title IX is about equal opportunity and equality within those opportunities. I won't argue one bit that NDSU provides the second part of the equation but the numbers clearly show they don't do the first, regardless of what some self monitored survey says.

Quick question, how much money do you think NDSU is currently getting and will be able to get in the future from those people on the backlog for season tickets? Here's a helpful hint since UND has had a waiting list for hockey tickets for years: Not much.

One of the major tenets of Title IX is opportunities and equality within those opportunities. Sure, the opportunities that are available may be on equal footing, but when the discrepancy between those numbers is so large, are there really equal opportunities? And the tired old argument about being able to point at some of the successes on the women's side and claim that means things are being done right is completely inaccurate. Title IX has nothing to do with success and everything to do with providing equal opportunities to be successful.

And I enjoy the wishful thinking that this won't be an issue for NDSU. I mean, they are what, still almost $2 million short on paying for the football renovations done almost 10 years ago. And what's the latest number on the shortfall for fundraising on the SHAC? $5 or 6 million? Or possibly even more.....? But you can keep telling yourselves that this is no sweat at all if it makes you feel better.

I fully support all of this. And feel free to make fun of my comments about e-mailing or contacting the administration but I fully support people doing that (in a respectful manner of course). How do you think that they get feedback on things? It isn't by reading message boards. People seem to think that they aren't approachable or they are impossible to get a hold of and it is quite the opposite. While I haven't received a response on every single e-mail I've written, I know that they are read. Does it make a ton of difference or "solve every problem"? It isn't going to change the entire course of action but I know that it does make some difference, I have been told that. I guess in my mind, its a solution that is much more worthwhile than complaining on a message board and then being shocked that somehow that opinion isn't taken into account. I'm truly am glad you appreciate the situation enough to do so, I wish more people did the same.

You keep insisting that they are ignoring FCOA and trying to run the department on a shoestring budget. I keep telling you that neither of those are true. I know for a fact they have paid very, very close attention to FCOA. That should be obvious since they are the only school in the area or conference that has announced they are paying it at some sort of level. In terms of budget, they can only work with what they are provided. This goes for all schools, not just UND. Just because some of our friends from the south think and proclaim they are able to provide FCOA across the board with no issues doesn't make it so. If it was that easy for them, they would have announced they were doing it immediately. Everyone is in a wait and see mode because it costs real dollars to do this. No one outside of the P5 schools particularly want to go down this path. Outside of a very select few, athletic departments lose money (lots of it in some cases) and only look they way they do because they are subsidized heavily by the schools themselves, state funds and student fees. Now all of that doesn't mean that UND can't and won't be able to offer FCOA even more so than they have already announced they will. They will continue to look for ways to fund it at whatever level they need to. They will continue to look for ways to strengthen the budget. It may end up that UND needs to cut 1-2 sports. At 21 sports, they sponsor significantly more than their peers (NDSU - 16, SDSU - 19, USD - 15, UM - 15, MSU - 15). If you really are that concerned about this, I urge you to write an e-mail to Faison and Kelley expressing your sentiments.

Not at the level some of their fans think. Pretty sure they need to figure out wrestling first as that is where they will see it have a material impact immediately. No coincidence their AD backed quite a bit after the initial announcement and hasn't said much since. And it isn't because they want to keep it "under the radar" as a competitive advantage.

Liberty has already announced they are offering it at the FCS level but they continue to push to move FBS. I do agree with your comments and can say that the athletic department is monitoring the situation closely and not with just the Big Sky schools. Again, it comes down to paying for it. If UND had the funds sitting around today, I fully believe they would do it across the board.

That still doesn't address the opportunity for participation part of the equation, a large part of what Title IX is meant to address. Athletic aid is 61/39 in favor of men's teams. Game-day operating expense is 64/36 in favor of men's teams. Total expenses (excluding unallocated) is 65/35 in favor of men's teams. Tell me again how those are equitable?

Trust me, you continue to show how clueless you are. But go on, please explain the basis for your brilliant thoughts.

Conferences won't come out against it, they aren't going to stick their necks out and risk a lawsuit.

Caught a little bit of practice Saturday morning: -Offense ran plays out of quite a few different formations, looks like they were working on bunching some WR's to help get them off the line untouched -Luke Stanley looks like he could be a huge match-up nightmare with his size. No clue how fast or quick he is as he only ran short and intermediate routes that I saw, but he's going to be able to go up and get some balls and the defense will have no chance -Demon Taylor looked good in individual drills -It looked like Reyes had soft cast on his wrist and wasn't practicing -The OL/DL both won some battles, couldn't quite tell who had the upper hand -Oscar Nevermann looked really good. My dislike for Craig Bohl grows further

That's seems like selective reading to me. They are proving the FCOA immediately where they will run up against it. It clearly states that for now they will only do 36. It also states that they will continue to monitor it. Honestly, if the funds where there, I can't imagine a scenario where UND doesn't declare they are doing it across the board immediately. They aren't trying to save money in some offshore bank account, they are trying to not bankrupt the department. As much as I hate to see it, I would support cutting 1-2 programs if necessary. UND sponsors 21 different teams, a good percentage higher than its peer schools.

Everyone? Not a chance, some will stubbornly continue to hang on to something that is never coming back and that is their prerogative I guess. But for the large majority of people, it will make a big difference. As long as there is nothing new to replace what was once there, the old name will continue to be used as a placeholder, which is exactly what a lot of the "no nickname" contingent is banking on and have been absolutely spot on thus far. The issue continues to be a net negative for the University. There is no possible measure where there are positives that outweigh negatives. Because of that, I have a hard time understanding those that are against moving on.

From what I hear, you'll be getting your wish on paying more for you Champions Club membership this year, not sure what ticket prices will be doing but should be finding out in the next few weeks when the renewal letters come out. Like I said, they are well aware of it but they can't just make money appear out of thin air. Its being worked on but the money needs to be there. Remember that UND's athletic department is already funded at something like 45% or so by school and state funds. It will need to come from a handful of sources and hopefully people respond to the challenge.

I guess UND could just keep using the interlocking ND and continue to be confused with Notre Dame half of the time. And I can't see how they would be a trend setter, how many schools do you actually think going without a nickname would be a good idea? I do agree with you on the UND brand part though but giving the athletic department a nickname will only further that not hinder it. My main point is that until UND moves onto a new nickname, there won't be closure and people will continue to cling onto the Fighting Sioux name. The vast majority need something to focus on, without that they will continue to look to the past.

The athletic department is well aware of the FCOA issues and how they will impact the athletic department despite what you might think or want to claim. I had a conversation months ago with them about it, well before any final details were ironed out at the NCAA level and there is a large issue on how it will be paid for (and this is with all of UND's peer schools, not just UND). This isn't like a scholarship which can be written off as a paper transaction if necessary, this is actual cash that will have to be paid out to student-athletes. I actually agree with gfhockey on not giving it to women's hockey, I don't think they need it as there are very few schools UND will be recruiting against that will offer it and the competitive advantage for spending it on women's hockey isn't there. They still have an advantage over the rest of the schools with facilities and shouldn't need the FCOA to put them over the top with the majority of recruits. I don't think UND will be seeing much of it from their competition in WBB or VB, but NDSU is going to have to offer it in wrestling before they do football and will need to offset it somewhere on the women's side. The ROI on WBB or VB would be more significant if used there. Guessing there have been some pretty interesting discussions as Idalski, Brewster and Pryor are all aware that money will need to be spent on the women's side and all want the money. UND doesn't end up going against a lot of Big Sky teams recruiting-wise in FB or MBB so even if UM or MSU or Weber start to partially offer it, I don't see it impacting UND, at least right away. If at this level (UND and its peers included) could do it that easily, they would in a heartbeat. No one has a clue how its going to be paid for because its an actual cash outlay and is a nightmare for AD's and athletic departments across the nation (outside of the P5 schools of course).

Can you fill me in on the accusations the meeting earlier this week was held illegally? Haven't had the time to look it up, but something about requiring a 24 notice and that wasn't done or something? Do they really have the support from the students and staff the claim? My understanding is that its a lot of grandstanding and starting to look like this one might be getting away from him, but curious if you're hearing similar. I'm by no means suggesting that there aren't issues with UND and tuition (neither of which are exclusive issues to UND), but this seems like it was handled completely the wrong way and has a good chance of blowing up in the student governments face and in the process, bringing completely unnecessary bad press to everyone.

The second part of your statement is dead on from the past Student Body presidents I've known as well. Not sure what the true motive is but seems like the current Student Body president wants to go out guns blazing. Reading the tea leaves, I don't think the support he claims to have is there and he made some pretty bold statements while claiming to have supporting documents. Seems like none of those supporting documents have been released despite comments being made that they would be made available. Interesting considering the matter is being revisited tomorrow. The amount of support from Rob Port and the lengths he has gone to defend the situation and the SB president also throw up a huge red flag to me.

So because you and a handful of casual fans you know don't know the nicknames to some randomly selected colleges UND should decide to not have a nickname? Never mind that it helps differentiate UND when being discussed outside the region, helps increase brand awareness and marketing and will be the only real solution to actually moving on and help put the Fighting Sioux nickname controversy behind them.

Didn't say they shouldn't, I agree with that part. I said the decision to give every ticket to them was the interesting part of it.

Will be interesting to see how that plays out. UND has offered a portion of single game tickets to the Champions Club members in the past but never the full allotment. Pretty ballsy move. I don't think it's very well thought out to not allow a single ticket for sale to the general public but that's just me.

I think the student body president has gotten himself in over his head in this one. Not going to argue that there isn't issues with university administrations in general and UND is no exception but he was looking for a fight to pick and found it. And I'd be careful on putting too much weight on "neutral" opinions from someone who is always looking to take down higher education.

Sounds like the student body president needs to start showing up at meetings he's invited to where some of these things have been discussed instead of claiming the administration is trying to hide things. But I guess that isn't as exciting.

As long as the drought doesn't reach 21 years with some down seasons in the middle.