jdub27

If GT had the power to dictate terms you keep saying he did, the contract would be signed. He doesn't, keep trying though. As the FU faithful like to keep claiming, business climates change. MSU didn't do anything that wasn't made possible by an agreement by both sides. They acted in their best interest like you're claiming GT did when he refused to sign a contract with terms that he dictated. Yet you're still complaining.

Or maybe, just maybe it was this: Seems pretty obvious that GT is saying that there has been some sort of communication in the last week or so. Why wouldn't Schlossman follow up and do another request? But keep tightening that tinfoil hat of yours.

Completely incorrect, but that won't stop you from continuing to repeat it. The article stated that Taylor made an offer in April 2011 and Faison agreed to it saying that the should get together and hammer out the details. A year later, in May 2012, GT told Izzo that they were close to getting the series restarted and Faison confirmed that it was a home/home, meaning they had been in contact figuring things out since neither seemed to have any qualms about what was reported. In January 2013, a contract was drafted and sent to GT with the details they'd been discussing since April 2011. From May 2012:

Also of note, GT insists they must schedule 6 home games plus an FBS game. Due to a home/home scheduled with Montana, he has already shown a deviation from this requirement in 2015. How about I help GT out with what will be a shortfall of revenues in 2015 due to him not following his schedule "requirements": 1)Schedule a game with UND (I'm sure Faison will even give him a home/home for helping) 2)Figure out the concept of dynamic pricing 3)Profit

You keep ignoring the fact that in April 2011, GT offered a home/home. Faison immediately responded that would work for UND. Faison "took the deal that was offered". Its all public record, I can't fathom how you continue to keep denying it. GT rescinded it and continues to move the goalposts. Bringing up negotiations that happened in 2009 have no bearing on what happened in 2011. Faison didn't accept some 2 year old offer, he accepted an offer that was made in April 2011. Its obvious that GT has no desire to play the game, but yet continues to make himself look like a fool by pretending to "negotiate" with himself with terms that are laughable.

Or they were requested because GT told the media that negotiations were ongoing so the Herald actually looked into whether it was true or not. But why ruin a good conspiracy though I'd love to see your proof.

And then GT offered the exact same thing in April 2011 and Faison accepted it. Faison called GT's bluff and Gene apparently wasn't and still isn't very happy about it. No surprise though.

No need to kid, that's exactly what happened.

Comprehension obviously isn't your strong point. Try reading below again and use some logic. In April 2011, UND was not "demanding" an every year game and GT was offering a home/home. They had been accepted into the Big Sky 6 months prior and filling the schedule was not the same concern it was in 2009. The home/home fit exactly into how Faison had been and continues to do his scheduling. You keep saying Faison didn't accept the deal. He responded to the e-mail saying it "will work for us". That doesn't sound like someone turning down a deal but keep trying to change what was actually shown directly from an open records request.

If that's the case, then maybe UND should demand what "FBS-like" schools are paying out for a guarantee games? Utah's paying $450K and Washington is playing $500K for UND to come out there in a few years. Guessing Faison would have no trouble agreeing to something around that.

Wrong. Faison accepted it, GT refused to sign the contract. The game was never going to be played before 2015. That's the years the have been negotiating on for years. I'm pointing out that GT said he has to have 6 home games and an FBS money game. Obviously not true, look at NDSU's 2015 schedule. Not possible.

You mean like what he shown he's willing to do as soon as 2015? 5 home games scheduled and 5 away FCS games scheduled. That 11th game can't be at home and an FBS guarantee game, something already has to give. All these reasons/excuses why he can't and won't do certain things, but a schedule full of games that show otherwise.

If that's the case then why doesn't he man up and come out and say that instead of telling Izzo that they are still negotiating.

It appears GT has none either since a contract hasn't been signed nor are they anywhere close to reaching an agreement.

Well at least the one thing GT is consistent on is moving the goal posts. "I know I offered one thing, but what I actually meant was something different." First the home/home and now the guarantee amount to something that is beyond laughable considering what one time guarantee games are going for. I'm guess GT is going to have to cough up around double what he's trying to offer Faison to fill their open date in 2015. I hope Faison is done trying to work with him, its clear that GT has zero intention of negotiating with even a shred of good faith.

Per the WSJ, the agricultural grants were the ones that were non-competitive plus their medical school wasn't being counted hurting them even more. The wording may not have been correct, but the premise behind it is more accurate than you're admitting.

Pictures of people in the shirt along with other tweets using a #siouxpersober hashtag are being retweeted and promoted by quite a few people, including one of the most vocal people behind the walk last Friday. Looks like they were created and being sold by powwowjamz.com I'm as amazed as you.

This has now become a thing and being supported by the some of the same people who are demanding that all Native American imagery be removed from UND's campus. Apparently their understanding of what zero tolerance actually means is a little off. I'd like to say I'm surprised but....

Not who I was talking about.

What coach was that? Pretty sure we aren't talking about the same coach.

He should have gotten GT's advice on how he accomplished that.

I thought it was interesting that they showed a great example of zero tolerance then they resorted to name calling. Paraphrasing: "What about Mr. Lousy...or is it pronounced Loser...the guy from Minot who proposed the bill, Louser"

Since you brought it up, you know what good business people don't do? Offer a deal and then fail to execute it after its agreed upon.

I don't disagree on that part and understand the logic. I'm just partial to the way it is now for the reasons I listed. And I still think UND's women would have won, they outplayed UM by quite a bit, but the home court advantage definitely played into that.

Posting things like this and twitter comments is giving them more attention then it deserves.