jdub27

Is this the new #butCIT? I've challenged people many times to voice their opinions to people who actually matter instead of complaining on a message board. I'll give credit to the few that do, but the large majority won't.

Nothing new, just cherry picking what you said and leaving out the part where you were really wrong. You said the dominance and balance of power was going to shift to Fargo not that the field was going to be more level. Grand Forks has won 5 of the 10 titles since then, Fargo has won 2.

You mean run the same play they did the possession before where Hooker got doubled and then forced into the corner and turned the ball over? Doesn't make sense to try that again when everyone in the building knew Hooker was going to take the last shot. The ball was inbounded at halfcourt, no one brought the ball up. To try to get Hooker open, they ran him off two screens through the middle lane. He got it, took a few dribbles and he absolutely beat his guy but the double team rotated over. Had that rotation not made it in time, that's the mid-range jumper he's been absolutely burying. His option was to swing it to Shanks, who didn't have an open shot on the defensive rotation and with de Rouen being the next option and was wide open in almost the exact spot he buried one a minute prior. I have no issues with arguing that either Tyler or Antwi be the guys to take the last shot over de Rouen but to claim they didn't run a play to get him open is off base. I can only imagine the (rightful) criticism is Jones would have called the same play that had led to a turnover the previous possession. Don't take this for supporting the whole game plan or anything else that happened, but the play Jones drew up for the final possession doesn't deserve criticism, especially when looking at the previous 39+ minutes.

Don't care if it went in, terrible shot selection. That being said, feed off it.

That sequence feels about right. Miss a layup on a fast break with a trailer, give up a dunk the other way and then miss another layup by a big man.

And Omaha rattles 7 in a row to cut the lead back to two.

Hooker is so good. Getting to the basket anytime he wants, hitting wide open guys and then gets an and-1 on a three pointer.

Love to see a strong second half to finish the home schedule. Prefer not to rely on the point shots as much this half.

As sad as it is, considering the city's loud party ordinance can be enforced at any time of the day anytime there are 2 or more people gathered together, I think there will be some sort of record set.

"the university is still the university and they are still the same athletic teams on the ice, field, and court. It is still the Kelly Green and White we are all used to seeing every weekend, every game, every season. Just because there isn't a name or a logo anymore, doesn't mean the history and tradition of it is dead." But somehow when a new nickname and logo is picked, all of this will change? As has been stated many times, "University of North Dakota" has, is and always will be the one constant, not what follows it. Besides having some inaccuracies, the writer even tips his hand basically stating that no nickname allows Fighting Sioux to continue to live on. That façade will only play for so long.

So what's the %gobc stance then?

It was from an article in the Herald that is now behind their paywall. I believe it was a 2-1 and UNI is coming here this year but can't currently verify it. The number of money games was slightly higher this year due to the upcoming trip. Guessing they could have swapped at least 2 of them for home/homes. Guessing you'll still have 2 sub D-1 schools on the schedule just because they are cheap home games. But overall, I think its doable as I would think the xDSU's will remain in the home/home arrangement. Add USD and try to get some rotation of Drake/UNO/UNI/etc (though some may require a 2-1).

Just to get it on record, what is the %gobc's stance on this particular matter?

I like this guy. Actually has a sense of humor!

Looks like they have a pretty broad cross-section of backgrounds/experience within the student and alumni groups, can't ask for much more than that. 4 current students including 2 student athletes 6 alumni including 2 who are former student athletes 1 professor

From Nelson's article in the Herald today (all home games): Would be a nice trend to reverse.

There will always be at least one or two games like that on the schedule. UND is not an anomaly on that. Minnesota played UM-Duluth and something called Franklin Pierce this year. Wisconsin played UW-Parkside. NDSU played UM-Crookston and Minot State. They are cheap, early season home games. I don't disagree with the majority of what you said. But I do think that unless you are going to guarantee at least 4-5,000 people, the atmosphere will be pretty stale, its a big arena. I thought the atmosphere at the NDSU game held at the Betty was just as good if not better than the one at the REA even though there was around 4,000 less people. However, if UND could bring in a big name opponent every year or two (not likely, but talking hypotheticals), I think playing a game like that in the REA makes a ton of sense. They just need to make sure the crowd shows up.

Very disappointing, not the first impression you want to make. On a somewhat related note, its interesting how Forum Communications seems to be so random on what they report on related to area colleges and athletes getting in trouble, regardless of severity or nature the violation. Seems like that unless someone specifically spells it out on a message board, it doesn't make the paper. Maybe they should check their own crime blotter now and then instead of relying on other people to do their work for them.

I get it but I personally thought the atmosphere was much better in the Betty last year vs. the REA three years ago. Would rather have a full and loud Betty than a half full REA.

Wait, why is UND firing the coach who led his team to a first round sweep and hiring the coach who lost her first round series in her own building?

Actually, the big difference is UND provides a lot more opportunities for student athletes, particularly on the women's side, in non-revenue sports. At UND last year, there were 449 total unduplicated participants in athletics with 244 being on the men's side and 205 being on the women's side. At NDSU, there were 411 total unduplicated participants in athletics with 282 on the men's side and 129 on the women's side. The breakdown on that is 54% men / 46% women at UND and 69% men / 31% women at NDSU. Talk about a joke. Would love to see the surveys that NDSU uses to justify that the "interest" for women's athletic opportunities are low that they can pull that off. They continue to be one of the only schools in the nation that uses the outdated "Interest and Abilities" for compliance to Title IX. Wonder if the growth in girls hockey within North Dakota and Minnesota is something that future students at NDSU would be interested in having an opportunity to participate in at the collegiate level...

Wouldn't be surprised if Simonson is the one who gets the call.

He has been worth the price of admission alone all year. Really enjoy watching him play. He took over in the second half yesterday, more of that would be just fine. Hope he keeps works on his outside shooting, would really round out his game. I'd guess Lillard would be a good comparison for where he needs to be to get a shot.

Link? And UND asking for clarification on how athletic scholarships advance academics is whining?