jdub27

PWO from Wyoming, seems like that staff has had an eye for QB's.

I mean, it took around a month for the Forum to reach out and get a comment, it seems that she has had plenty of time to get herself together and be confident in what she is saying.

You're ignoring the comment the mom made that the supplement came from a trusted staff member.....so either ndsu, or someone who is considered to be a staff member, provided it or an NDSU hall of fame member is unnecessarily making accusations with seemingly nothing to gain.

I know you said it is common for players to take pre-workout supplements before lifting, and I have no arguments there and fully agree that is commonplace everywhere, however I don't think that really applies to this situation. How common is it that players are ingesting supplements ("pre-workout" or others) before games? That would seem to be the issue since he was over the NCAA limit on some sort of stimulant after being tested after the semi-final game. Was it a mistake by taking too much or for some reason did the body not metabolize it is as fast as normal so he got popped for it.

True, but the AD also specifically stated he received it from another student-athlete. That comment is quoted directly in the article.

Oddly enough, McFeely wrote an article lauding Mr. Newman a few days before the FCS championship. So NDSU reimburses for travel, but who's actually paying him because he isn't doing it for free. Also, again if true and that is where it came from, what is the relationship to the supplements he's allegedly recommending/providing? Is it something he is profiting by selling them to the school or student-athletes? Seems like a lot of questions that would have been a good follow-up because now there is just a ton of speculation.

If that accusation is true, what is going on that a motivational speaker is allowed to recommend and supply supplements to players? Holy hell that is a lack of control.

And what happens with the results of those in-season, non-playoff tests? Who administers punishment, if any, for failure of those those? Hint - NDSU gets the results, not the NCAA, and they aren't required to do anything with the results. BR had been taking it since halfway through the season by his own admission yet skated by without it being picked up. Though I seem to remember a handful of "violation of team rules" resulting in a game or two suspensions over the year with no other explanations, but then again, if they are failing tests from things being given by the coach, probably let those ones slide.

Based on the Forum's willingness to break these stories, can you say without a doubt that is accurate? There have multiple players who have been suspended or left the team due to "violation of team rules" with no explanation or followup.

I'll give him credit for writing something but with how pissed the parents are, it was going to come out, just like the suspension did, eventually. He sure didn't follow up anywhere as much as he could have though which is a benefit to ndsu. Left a lot of plausible deniability out there when there is plenty more details that could be mentioned.

Clearly she had an axe to grind as NDSU's first WBB All-American and member of the athletics hall of fame.... But as the saying goes, "Once a bison always a bison (until it is inconvenient)."

So either the kid is lying or NDSU is and they are calling him one. Wonder which party has more to lose and isn't telling the truth....?

He was the #2 QB on the board but yet NDSU offered 3 other QB's (Bycznski, Roddy and Lewis) a scholarship before him? Strange way to run a recruiting board. Also must have been a surefire "#2" if they were still bringing in QB's on visits before extending an actual scholarship offer.

Exactly. The quote that simple dan put out there isn't something Danny is stating to anyone. I have no doubt he told the kid something along those lines that an opportunity like that could be out there with an open QB competition both this year and then next after Nate and Zim graduate, but not a chance he's risking his first shot at OC by promising a starting role to a kid who isn't on campus.

NDSU made their offer on Thursday at their in-home visit and asked him to not publicly announce it, which he didn't. He announced every other offer and PWO opportunity but didn't say a word about his NDSU offer when he got it. Makes it pretty hard to pretend that it isn't a very likely scenario (for the record, it actually happened but we can still talk in hypotheticals). Seems like one of two things (or a combination of them): 1) NDSU was still deciding what to do with the QB from Florida that had just visited and told him an offer might be coming (confirmed by the kid). He also had other offers, so another QB announcing an offer from NDSU could throw a wrench into keeping him on the line, holding out and waiting. 2)They knew UND had offered him and weren't sure which was he was leaning. If the his offer never gets made public, plausible deniability that UND beat them out on him or at least can claim it was never anything more than the previous PWO.

If it means only 4 home games in a season, I'm absolutely against it. Already disappointed they aren't taking advantage of the 12th game this year to buy an additional home game or set it up for good home game in the next few years by traveling.

I recall at least one in that time frame, though it was for snow, not temp.

Can't continue coaching at a school when your current contract is up. His 2 year deal that "kept" him from Iowa was through the 2018 season/early 2019 offseason. Not hard to read between the lines on why he moved on. But hey, he managed to be the best recruiter on back to back 13th best recruiting classes in the B1G the last two years.

So Rutgers bumped up his salary to $325K/$350K to keep him (roughly the same money Polasek got at Iowa) but you want us to believe he "voluntarily" took something like a 75% pay cut to come to NDSU?

Kid managed to go from an FCS PWO to a B1G PWO, before getting a different FCS school to offer him a scholarship late in the process. It forced his top choice to offer him a full ride after they were set on giving him nothing. Worked out well for the kid. As for UND, they have one or other two they have had their eyes on they can move on to.

Strange that NDSU didn't contact him again until mid-January, like a week after the dead period was over. You'd think they would be a little more urgent to get back to their "#2 choice" after knowing for multiple weeks they lost their #1 choice...

For multiple entities. Add in USA Today's college finance site, the UND/NDUS financials and the athletic departments AUP report and you have a pretty good start.

Just want to point out separately that this point is completely inaccurate. UND paid an additional $247K to the REA outside of the 52% of ticket revenue for other things such as ticketing. And neither of those figures include an additional $1.1 million paid for "utilities, maintenance staff, phone service and other expenses".

I don't think the SHAC is much better than the BESC, especially considering the amount of money put into renovating it. The bowl seating is nice, but the seats are cramped and somehow very far from the court. The additional practice gym that has been floated would be a nice addition for all 3 programs that utilize the BESC. Guessing the outstanding loans need to be paid off first, only ~2 years remaining on those.

Here's my big hang-up. These numbers only go back to 2005, which pre-dates the origination of the usage agreement, but does tie-in closely with when the BESC was built and slightly pre-dates the move to D1, so we'll call it is close enough. Ticket sales have went from $3,156,300 in 2005 to $4,551,261 in 2017. So instead of seeing a $1.4 million boost to their budget, the athletic department has seen 48% of that ($670K) and with the REA has seen the remainder ($725K increase) over the 13 years. In 2005, the REA got $1.64 million from UND just on ticket sales. In 2017, they received $2.37 million. Costs have went up, and with that, it makes sense for the REA to not stay at the flat $1.64 million they got in 2005, but what is the reasoning behind a 44% ($725K from 2005 to 2017) increase over the last 13 years ? What has changed and/or what is the need for REA need to continue to eat into the extra revenues from ticket growth? This is the exact reason why the usage agreement should have actually been negotiated every year instead of left alone and it's absolutely crazy that REA board had the reaction they did when someone suggested actually renegotiating it. For reference, if the usage agreement would have been a flat amount (using 2005 as a starting point), UND would have paid the REA $21.3 million over the last 13 years. In reality, they have paid $26.1 million, an additional $4.8 million. That works out to an average of $368K/year for the athletic department (much less in the early years, significantly now in the later years). Again, I'm not saying the amount the REA has gotten over the last 13 years shouldn't have increased, I just don't understand why has risen the amount it has. Taking a look at the reserve accounts in various entities gives you a pretty good idea that they have gotten more then enough funds from the arrangement (again something that is needed, but the level and amount starts to become questionable). Not to mention with women's hockey being cut, UND is actually using the REA less, meaning expenses are lower and the REA has more availability for outside revenues. On top of all of the ticket revenue paid under the usage agreement, UND still pays a significant amount for other things at the REA as well. They paid an $247K to the REA outside of the 52% of ticket revenue for ticketing/other services and then an additional $1.1 million paid for "utilities, maintenance staff, phone service and other expenses". So when you try to lump those into what UND is "getting" for the 52% of the ticket revenue, you're actually including things UND is paying for separately. This still doesn't explain why football revenue is tied into the REA usage agreement outside of it was done that way almost 20 years ago when revenues were significantly less so it may have been needed, but there's an additional $1.4 million of ticket revenue flowing in now.