Bisonfan1234

Like i said in the past 2 posts (maybe read them next time?), upgrading our athletics is not causing us to upgrade our adademics and research. It's the other way around! We're upgrading our whole image as a university.

4 years

USD doesn't sound interested in D1 at all. UND however, has the facilities (and are still upgrading) to go D1.

Not only don't i care how our athletes do academically, i don't think it should be expected of them to do any better than the average student.

These people don't have to do more than the basic graduation requirements. So why should the NCAA push athletes to do more than those people? I don't agree with that...that's all.

We aren't moving to D1 because we want to be a better research institution. We're moving to D1 because we ARE upgrading to become a better research institution. We're basically just upgrading the entire university from top to bottom as far as i understand.

You can't compare statistics from one season to the next and expect to get a relative comparison. The only correct speculation (IMO) can be what if Bohl was d-coordinator this year or what if the new d-coordinator was in that position a few years ago when you clain Bohl was 55th.

This is only my opinion, but i believe the NCAA sets an unrealistic goal when they want athletes in college to be just as good of students as non-athletes. The amount of time put into athletics plus i believe that some athletes simply don't posess both athletic and academic ability. Should this mean they shouldn't be considered for the top athletic institutions. IMO, no! It's absurd! Athletes are meant to do what they're meant to do...play sports. I don't think they should be expected to be brillient scholors as well. They should have to pass the basic graduation requirements but i dislike the image that the NCAA is pushing of the student athlete who goes to class, puts a bunch of time into his sport, and then stays up late at night to do a bunch of homework. As if they were machines that didn't require entertainment and fun. Nonsense! If Stauss had another chance to do over his quote i believe he would replace "everthing" with something else. Because obviously one win doesn't trump all other criteria...but it does trump some criteria. Speaking of bad quotes by college athletes this weekend...did anyone hear Winslow's quote after UM lost to UT?

If you think he implied something that was not quoted, then that becomes speculation and is now your opinion. My opinion is simply that our win over Montana should count for more than it does. Even after saying that he says that it would take a miracle for us to get in. Brent, I don't understand why you wish doom apon our athletics. I hope UND can bring the rest of their sports up to the D1 level and start playing us again because i will miss the Bison-Sioux rivalry and i don't think it should be played again until we're in the same division. Also to answer you question of why? Mainly, NDSU is trying to reclassify itself into the highest echelon of research institutions. We want to to be known for our research and development in the areas of engineering, science, and so on. A big part of that and indeed our total image is athletics. If we upgrade our academic and research abilities then so shall it be with our athletics. We're not looking at this from an athletic only basis whereby we wouldn't move up until we secured a conf., etc.

I don't think they'll put a 3 loss NCC team over a 2 loss NSIC team (assuming we beat CSP and WSU loses to UMD).

Noone denies that it's just fine to be outside when the conditions are good enough. But indoor is the only way up here once it gets cold.

Politics probably. Lots of MIAA guys that vote i'm sure.

They hired a new AD who has alot of D1 experience. I think UND definately SHOULD move D1...but your prez (or AD ... whoever it was) had a bad experience moving to D1 so it probably won't happen.

Like i mentioned before...this board doesn't necessarily correspond directly with the populations of either town. In other words, just because 20 or so of you sioux fans like the idea of an outdoor stadium doesn't mean the majority of GF people do...and beyiond all that...i doubt that more than a fraction of a percent would want to publically fund another building for football.

Not when it was cold.

I've cahnged my mind about hockey...it's a pretty fun sport to watch. It's just too expensive to start up a program from scratch. If you want to make money at it you have to have a nice arena,etc. ISU doesn't have an Englested to donate 100 mil.

I'm definately not hardcore then.

I suspect the overwhelming majority to be for outdoor since most of you are "hardcore" fans.

I think the vikes are in "me too!" mode. The metrodome is plenty good enough...but it always comes down to money.

I think you know where i stand.

Ford field is a dome...just to clear things up. www.fordfield.com if you don't believe me.

I see what you're saying Dave and i agree that not only have domes been replaced in the past but they are also being replaced now and in the future. I have a possible reason for this. I would consider you (and alot of people who post on this and Bisonville) to be hardcore fans. You like to yell loudly for your team, watch the game outdoors even in unhealthy temps, etc. You have to understand that not everyone is like this. In fact, i think the percentage of people who are hardcore fans like this is fairly constant throughout football. In other words, whatever percentage this happens to be of hardcore fans out of total fans is the same from the pros to college. Here is where the difference comes in. Pro teams such as Seattle, Detroit, and Green Bay have VASTLY huge fan bases. And thats why even when it gets to the coldest games, they still have enough hardcore fans left willing to go to the game to sell it out. UND and NDSU don't have this type of base. When they had their outdoor stadiums (as was posted earlier) sometimes only 2000 people showed up. Having an indoor stadium allows every fan to still come to game an watch. Thus, I don't think it's fair to the average fan to have an outdoor stadium because if we want to come watch...well forget it! So that's why if it came to a vote i would definately vote no against an outdoor stadium. Of course there is always a compromise (retractable roof stadium). But at this level i doubt that NDSU or UND could afford one of those without a large contribution. Lastly, i just wanted to point out that Seattle is actually in a very fair-weather climate. The average jan. temps for them are compairable to Kansas City. Of course, Green Bay and Detroit are very cold in jan which either means that their fan bases are much large (could be true as they are much older franchises and are in a more populated areas of the US) which would mean more hardcore fans, their hardcore fan % is higher than in seattle (also could be very true since those people are likely to be used to cold weather), or both.

You're quite biased against indoor football i see. Indoor sports have big advantages over outdoor sports because they can be played at any time, anywhere with exact same game conditions. Sure, maybe in the south you can still play ok outdoors right now, but up here it's just stupid. There is a difference between having the weather advantage and just plain treating people cruely. It's 20 degrees here with at least a couple inches of snow on the ground and more on the way...that's just sickening to think about being outside in. By bringing football indoors we can finally level the playing field with the south schools that have good weather year round for outdoor sports. And getting the new style of turf will be just like having grass...it's a win-win situation. Sorry about memorial and outdoor football in general...but that's the old way of life...we're moving on now. I know people are afraid of change...but this really is the right move for both players and fans.

I still think you're stuck on Astroturf which i would agree is completely different from grass. The new stuff is the same thing as grass (in other words...anything good that grass brings to teh table...this stuff has it too), but it doesn't require cutting, watering, seeding, fertalizing, and it drains better. Also, the oldest version of this new stuff (called AstroPlay) has been around for 4 or maybe more years..it's proven itself as durable so many teams are switching to it to save big in the long run.

North Dakota versus Kansas...who is the better state? Muahaha...