jdub27

But you taking a moral victory on an apples to oranges comparison is OK? Anyone can skew any combination of numbers to make the point they want to.

Considering one plays 4x more than the other, not a real valid comparison. But I guess using your brilliant methodology, UND hockey is more popular because it draws more collective fans to its games? Can't play both sides of the fence.

http://shipyourenemiesglitter.com/

Hoping he has more like it. Just an absolutely enthralling story, had me on the edge of my seat!

One thing I've noticed with Miller's is that he absolutely will not put anything in the paper without a solid source. Personally, I think he has pretty good coverage with the resources the Herald gives him and despite what others will claim, his articles are pretty direct and not all "duckies and bunnies".

They adopted a new nickname by using something that has been in place for over 130 years? I guess the definition of "new" escapes you.

The 9-2 margin is an encouraging sign as well.

Some people will never change, I won't argue that, but they are the minority. The majority will. I continue to wear Sioux gear (and will in the future) but a lot of that has to do with there not being a replacement yet. I've purchased some interlocking ND stuff, but very little, mainly because I don't care for it. Once there is a true replacement, you will start to see a shift.

I really think him and Shanks can be a great combo. Hooker seems to know where to put passes and Shanks looks like he can get position down low. They've had a few nice connections and drive and dumps, though a couple of the passes have been a little too hard but were there. Hopefully they can keep it up. And I agree that Hooker needs to take more shots.

Purely opinion. The wording of the agreement says UND has to pick a new nickname and logo. They have not done that. They are using the same "nickname" they have had since 1883 and the same interlocking logo that they had before the nickname was retired. And I'll give you credit, at least you are honest about your reasoning for wanting to not pick a new nickname.

Who recommended and fully endorsed Hak?

UND has changed their logo and/or brand many times over the last 130 years, not sure what your point is there. The Fighting Sioux nickname alone was rebranded multiple times in its existence. Where are you getting this millions of dollars number from? Even if that is the case, wouldn't the majority of it be the same dollars that would be used to implement the interlocking ND logo you want? I'd have a lot easier time believe the "No Logo/Nickname" crowd if it wasn't painfully obvious that it is a façade for being able to use Fighting Sioux as a de facto nickname.

Guessing only for a year then off to another school?

People are confused why Notre Dame's logo is in a odd shaped rectangle.

The fact that anyone can actually think this is moving too fast is absolutely mind-boggling. This has been going on for the better part of a decade or longer, depending on when what event you decide was the beginning of the end. And on top of that, having the legislature require this to drag out two more years? Absurd. Do you think someone's going to invent a new word or name and logo in the next years and UND will miss out on it? The options then will be what the options are right now. Use the first committee's recommendations to form a committee to come up with a name and let them put some options out there.

That picture does not do the massive size of that place justice.

When UND comes up, the debate is (and will continue to be about) people holding onto a retired nickname. Seems to me that picking a new one would go a long way in ending that debate.

Still think that they just didn't know how to use it yet. Though I also expected to see improvements throughout the year but didn't.

It would never happen, but if that is the case, I would love to see them openly defy it just for the entertainment and see how far off the charts the pucker factor coming from Bismarck would be.

So much this.

Serious question: What if UND just flat out ignores it and (rightfully) decides they know what's best for themselves? Guessing Mr. Louser (who is on Minot State's Board of Regents) has very little information on the actual impact to UND. While the SBoHE has problems of its own, the State Legislature continues to make it very clear why they shouldn't have unlimited power over the state's universities.

My personal observation only, but Sundogs only seems to be a popular straw man on this board. Can't say I've talked to anyone who's seriously mentioned it as an option. Doesn't even crack my top 20, but I've heard and read on here suggestions that I think are a lot worse.

I think Carter and Harris could make a very nice combo at CB. Agree that depth is a concern though.

You are correct, the do not pass designation is what I meant. My mistake.