jdub27

How many decades has it been since UND's starting QB had a mustache like that? 3? 4?

Playing them twice this season: @Milwaukee on 10/10 In Grand Forks on 12/9

Milwaukee and Idaho are good home games. Nice to see.

Part of the reason Keaton's abilities weren't used to the max was because there wasn't anyone behind him ready to step in, which we saw in full effect when he did go out. Letting him roll out or run more just wasn't the smart thing to do. Obviously that leads to a debate about recruiting, but it is what it is.

Well, I guess technically UND didn't have a women's head coach for 48 days or so since that was the amount of time between Martinson's contract expiring and Sunderman being hired. Guess a new angle will have to be found to overreact about.

I think the staff is comfortable with what they have at setter, though there might be some growing pains. I'd keep an eye on the UConn transfer, sounds like athletic ability is off the charts and will make some noise.

I hope that joke never gets old. I think we can all agree the offense needs to show a bit more this year in terms of production and creativity. Keaton was a great game manager and did what he was asked, particuarly not turning the ball over. His replacements are going to add a spark to the offense, but we'll likely have to deal with a few more turnovers. If the defense stays healthy, I'm OK with that. However the majority of that will hinge on the OL coming together. Without that, playcalling will continue to be pretty straightforward and frustrating.

I mean, you have to take into account Brady started getting quite a few more carries as well. Yes, they absolutely need to find a way to get John the ball in space but you need to have confidence the QB actually has time to do that and I'm not sure that's been the case the last year or two. I keep reiterating there is plenty of room for improvement, but I don't think it is as bad as some people claim (or at least the numbers don't back that up) and I think it's closer to what Bubba wants than what some people are willing to admit. This team will live and die by the defense as long as he's head coach. If/when he does make a change, I agree with the earlier comment that I think the answer is already on staff. 2015: 223/1,459, 6.5 ypc (Brady - 60 carries) 2016: 183/983, 5.4 ypc (Brady - 168 carries) 2017: 119/717, 6.0 ypc (Brady - 111 carries, JJ 41 - carries) Also, he has to compete with Prothero for all-conference, so your comments on other Big Sky backs is void.

All-purpose player his junior year, return specialist his sophomore year and running back his freshman year. He's also been 3x first-team all-conference as a running back (along with first team return specialist his sophomore year).

You don't think there was a reason for that.....? I get people's frustration with the offense, but it's a ball control offense that Bubba wants to play. He would have made a change if the OC wasn't following the game plan that's laid out. UND isn't supposed to have an explosive offense (though that's not saying there is not room for improvement). I've posted the comparison of stats from 2016 to 2017, as a whole, the offense wasn't the issue. Lack of depth (injuries and attrition) on the OL has been the biggest issue holding the offense back. Yet despite that, somehow UND has managed to simultaneously have a 3x All-American and 2x All-Conference running back so something has to be slightly working. For the record on where the offense actually ranks: 2017: 51/123 in yard/game and 56/123 in points/game in 2017 (should be 66/123, removing 4 defensive TD's) 2016: 53/122 in yards/game and 37/122 (should actually be 54/122, removing 5 defensive TD's) Conclusion: the offense is average. Hoping to see a bump this year, but will all depend on how the OL comes together.

I'm glad to hear the amount was they high. That being said, literally the only other option they have is to spend the money on the arena. It's a nonprofit set up for the benefit of UND. Even though a large portion of the fans would probably rather see that, a significant investment on unnecessary items would not make for good optics with recent budget situations. I know they are aware of this because there are at least one or two sizable projects that have been delayed.

Exactly. Obviously things can change, but he'll be 67 when he steps down. I don't think he's looking for a new, long-term gig.

Quoted for truth. First ballot hall of famer.

No issues with that, I don't think there is anyone who would have issues with some of the conference ideas mentioned here. The people in charge should have general ideas of the landscape and be in looking into possibilities to protect themselves in the future. The issues arise when claims are made from jumping to wild-ass conclusions based on nothing but half-truths and 100% speculation when the facts and logical reasoning say otherwise, but yet it is still declared as the de facto plan of action. Then, when deadlines like July 1 pass with no action, making an excuse why something didn't happen, even though there were plenty of people saying why it wouldn't in the first place. It's one thing to say "Here's an interesting possibility" and having a discussion about it. It's completely different than saying "Here's what's going to happen, you just don't have the vision to see it" and then fail to take into account any reasoning on why the idea doesn't have any chances of working.

Or it could be tickets for event(s) that already occurred. The suspense is unbearable!

So why would 10 FCS teams want to up and join that right now (and this is assuming that they actually could, which is not guaranteed and requires a ton of moving parts to come together)? This talk about getting access to potential CFP money in 2026 when the contract expires assumes that the P5 will be willing to continue to give the G5 a proportionate piece of the pie, when they have been working towards giving them less. Right now, the G5 are currently getting $81.32 million combined between the 5 conferences. It is split out mostly equal between the 5 conferences, with a little bit set aside to be given out based on performance. Based on that, each conference is getting roughly $16 million or between $1.1-1.6 million per team. The estimates if the playoff field was to expand to 8 teams is that the contract would increase by roughly 50% from where it is now. So a best case scenario is that this new start-up conference gets $24 million ($16 million plus 50%) and splits it 10 ways, giving each school an additional $2.4 million in additional revenue. And that's again, assuming the P5 plays nice and actually would increase the percentage of money they would share with the G5. Does anyone really think the P5 cares if the G5 expands to the G6 and just because of that, they would allocate them a bigger piece of the pie? Decent chance they'd leave them at roughly the same percentages (best case) or just tell them to pound sand and they'll get whatever crumbs they feel is appropriate, which is what they have continued to do. Does an extra $2.4 million justify adding 22 scholarships on the men's and women's side (which would probably require an additional sport) plus the increase in coaching expenses, travel expenses and the general budget increases? Don't get me wrong, I'd love a conference like the proposed one, I just don't see a realistic path to getting there at this point in time. A major shift in the landscape could change that, but it seems less likely since the G5 has continued to give the P5 whatever they want, lessening the chances of them doing something drastic. Any and all talk at UND does not involve any of these pie in the sky scenarios, it involves getting athletics where they need to be to compete in the Summit and MVFC. Any claim that UND will never play a game in the MVFC is laughable.

Offensive lineman out of a prep school from Canada. Not sure why he isn't on the roster yet, but I believe there was a bit of a hang-up getting him on campus. Can't see where his actual signing was officially mentioned by UND but got a late offer the end of February and signed in early May. Had at least one other offer from Howard if that matters.

Pretty sure he'll still be employed by the Alumni Foundation, however his focus will be on gifts "for the University" not "for Athletics" like it previously was. Awkward wording with his title and how they worded it. Separate but semi-related subject: Didn't realize how many people actually work for the Alumni Foundation. Quite a few more than I would have thought.

No reason it can't be both. In this case, it definitely was, which is why they went above and beyond.

Guess I disagree with most of this. The write-ups are what they are supposed to be: short, high-level updates on practice. Yesterday they touched on the QB race with a video interview with Rudolph, so there was a bit more content with that. They intentionally aren't going to go in-depth or speculate on a lot of the things fans want to know, that would actually be a bit crazy. For comparison, NDSU hasn't had a single write-up on their own website yet. Yes, they are in a different spot and don't need to "promote" their team, but they literally haven't posted on fall camp on their website, the only thing I've seen on their fall camp is a few short clips on Twitter. Hoping to see some of this Midco show we've been hearing about sooner than later. UNDFB360 continues to do great things and can provide a little more "insight" and speculation than traditional media can. The Herald has had 8 articles on the football team since camp started, so almost daily. Majority of them aren't really daily practice updates on position battles, etc, but they are at least putting some stuff out there. Obviously the majority here (including myself) would like to see a bit more but looking it up, it was more than I thought.

UNDsports.com has literally had a write-up every single day of fall camp so far. Not sure what more people want, they aren't going to go in-depth on things like position battles or speculate on playing time, nor should they.

Whatever year it is, it will definitely happen before July 1.....

You seem to be the only one with that "vision". I've based my opinions on conversations with people that are actually involved in these decisions and day to day operations. The things you claim literally aren't even on the radar in any realistic matter. And before you claim they don't talk about things like that in public, feel free to look back and see what my comments were on UND moving to the Summit despite your objections that it wouldn't happen.

In related news, old friend Gene Taylor just inked Bill Snyder to a 5 year extension through the 2022 season, when he will be 84. UND plays KSU in 2020, when Sndyer will be 80 years old.

Article in the Herald said they were down, which is expected after last season. As for your second part, season tickets are $465 for 21 games for hockey ($22/game). Football tickets are $94 for 5 games ($18/game). Not a huge difference that route. I assume you were referencing single game tickets, which are $25-30 for football vs $25-49 for hockey.