ShilohSioux

What happened in Laramie? I thought Christiansen was a pretty good coach who was going to turn things around there? Men's bb appears to be in the toliet there too. That too bad....I've always liked the Cowboys and admired their passionate, all-state following.

So, for us out-of-towners who get to GF for games or other UND events when we can, what are the best places for food and ambiance these days?

Detroit Lakes is also the home of current Fighting Sioux women's basketball captain Corey Lof so we still have a good pipeline going from Detroit Lakes to Grand Forks.

I'm not disagreeing with anything written in this thread but it seems so odd that we love the university (and its athletic teams) so much but dismiss a large percentage of the faculty as arrogant, morans, etc....? What is it about the university experience that has made us passionate about the institution despite the faculty, or is the university senate not representative of many of the faculty we knew or remember?

I believe we played Saturday evening in Vermillion.

http://www.grandfork...icle/id/192728/ UND University Senate votes to oppose bills seeking to save Sioux nickname UND's University Senate has adopted a resolution opposing all three Fighting Sioux nickname bills under consideration at the North Dakota Legislature By: Chuck Haga, Grand Forks Herald UND's University Senate has adopted a resolution opposing all three Fighting Sioux nickname bills under consideration at the North Dakota Legislature. The vote Thursday was overwhelming, with only a few members voting against or abstaining, said Curtis Stofferahn, professor of sociology and vice president of the University Senate. An exact vote count was not immediately available. The University Senate includes faculty, staff, student and administration representatives. Its vote against the nickname bills follows a similar action Jan. 23 by the UND Student Senate. The University Senate resolution used language from the Student Senate resolution, noting that the university has begun the transition away from the nickname and logo, the bills would "only reignite the division over the 'Fighting Sioux' nickname and logo and further divide our university, the city of Grand Forks and the state of North Dakota." Also, according to the resolution, there would be "unknown" costs to a potential new legal battle with the NCAA. The University Senate resolution had included a clause from the Student Senate action concerning potential implications for UND's entry into the Big Sky Conference. Stofferahn said intercollegiate athletics representatives on the Senate said the nickname is not an issue there. In various forms, the three House bills would direct UND to retain the nickname and logo. Two would mandate keeping the symbols unless a referendum at Standing Rock Sioux Reservation goes against their use. The third bill, sponsored by House Majority Leader Al Carlson, R-Fargo, simply declares that intercollegiate athletic teams at UND "shall be known as the University of North Dakota Fighting Sioux," and authorizes the attorney general to consider filing a federal antitrust claim against the NCAA if it seeks to penalize the university. The NCAA in 2005 directed all member schools to eliminate Native American nicknames, logos and mascots or face sanctions. UND appealed, then sued the NCAA when its appeal was rejected. A negotiated settlement of that lawsuit gave the State Board of Higher Education until last fall to win the OK of two namesake tribes, Standing Rock and Spirit Lake, to keep the Fighting Sioux name and logo. Spirit Lake voters and the Tribal Council there gave their approval, but efforts to arrange a vote at Standing Rock failed. In April, the state board directed UND to begin the transition process away from the name and logo. Stofferahn said he "was approached by a number of groups on campus" and asked to bring the resolution to the University Senate. "They were concerned that, after the hearing on these bills, they thought the university community should be heard from as an official body," he said. The discussion on his resolution "was remarkably brief," he said. "Compared to earlier years when we had this discussion, there was very little contentiousness. Even those who said they are ambivalent or even in favor of keeping the nickname said it was time to move on. It's too divisive an issue to keep hanging over our heads. They want it resolved." One faculty member of the Senate called the nickname debate "a millstone around the university's neck," Stofferahn said. He said he has sent copies of the resolution to members of the House Education Committee and members of the Grand Forks legislative delegation. The Education Committee heard more than eight hours of testimony on the bills Jan. 26 and may act on the proposed legislation later this week, the committee chairman said. Reach Haga at (701) 780-1102; (800) 477-6572, ext. 102; or send e-mail to chaga@gfherald.com.

Saturday's attendance in Vermillion: Men's Game: 2,867Women's Game: 2,169

Why do we have more fans at women's games than men's games? Most places it's just the opposite. I was attending women's games before it was popular or commen (and have two daughters who play the game) so I'm delighted to see the support for the women, but honestly then men's game is faster paced and generally more exciting (not saying the women's isn't). Why would we be so different than most places? Will that change if the men consistently put a winner on the court?

Ok, if they're not going to use pairs or allow the "lone wolf" approach like the WAC does with Hawaii, I guess the Friday-Saturday thing is out. Too bad. I really think that would have aided the size and enthusiasm of the crowd. Not only are they more vocal on the weekends, but some folks from out of town, like me, can come for a Friday-Saturday series but not generally Thursday-Saturday or Saturday-Monday.

Vegas already hosts the WCC tournament at the Orleans Arena, and the Mountain West Conference tournament at the Thomas & Mack Center at UNLV. That's both the men and the women for both. Not sure there's room for the Big Sky, or if we want to play third fiddle to those two.

I'm not making myself clear. With 11 teams, someone is going to be solo. If it was us, then teams wouldn't have to worry about playing a second game the next night or two nights later. They come to Grand Forks for one game, then go home. So, say Idaho State plays in GF Friday night, and Weber State Saturday night. Neither team has another game on this road trip. Someone is going to have to be single....why not us?

But if teams only have to come our way for one game it shouldn't matter to them what night they play us. And, if teams will play us Friday or Saturday, they won't miss out on school as much as if they played us on Thursday.

I know there are drawbacks and some here don't care for it but I really like the idea of a 20 game, double round-robin basketball schedule. First, it provides a true regular season champion and accurate placings. Don't have to worry about who didn't play who and is it fair, or that who you play or don't play will impact conference tournament qualification or seeding. Second, it means more of the games have meaning. Assuming we play half our games at home, 10 of the 14 will count for something in league and we don't have to wait six weeks into the season for a game that truly counts in the standings. Now, my other wish list items are a) annual non-league tilts with NDSU and USD.... plus an annual game with either Minnesota or Wisconsin; b) Friday-Saturday night games (opposite hockey) so the crowds will be larger. The last one is probably a pipe dream but if we're the odd-team outlier due to geography, maybe the others will go for it since they would be coming our way for a single game? Mr. Faiso, can you make this happen?

Ahhhhh. Gotcha.

I only meant that to show what a visceral reaction one would get if they even suggest a return to the Big Sky. I don't think the NCAA has ever seriously considered busting someone back to FCS status. If anything, they've been allowing marginal programs to move up. Also, unless this is butts-in-the-seats, universities can sell tickets inexpensively to some big individual or corporate donor, or they can play one "home" game at another site (Idaho did this by playing "home" games at nearby Washington State, including one game against WSU itself! And they could do it by playing a game in Pullman or Boise if needed). I don't really see Idaho being told to go back by the NCAA.

I dare anyone to go onto the Vandal forum and suggest they go back to FCS and the Big Sky: http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=205 After hearing venom that would make a Bison fan blush, they will point out that the 12-15K they average now is a lot better than what they averaged in the Big Sky (when Boise State and Nevada were still there and Northern Colorado, Sacramento State and Southern Utah weren't). Many of them will advocate dropping football before being in a league that includes very few peer institutions, and schools they see themselves as better than academically and athletically (particularly the "directional schools" Northern Arizona, Northern Colorado, Southern Utah, Eastern Washington, Portland State, etc...). The only BSC school they feel an affinity for is Montana. It might not be rational, but that's the view from the Vandal faithful.

Of the 9 current BSC teams, 7 have released their complete schedules for next year. Sac State still has to announce one game, and Portland State still has to announce their schedule. All of the BSC teams are playing at least one FBS game. And of the 7 with complete schedules, five are playing D-II teams including two playing teams moving from NAIA to D-II. While playing a full FCS/FBS schedule is attractive from a playoff qualification standpoint, a majority of teams in the Big Sky seem to schedule one lower-level opponent each season. Unless the new 13-team BSC will allow teams to play conference opponents as non-conference games, it appears this won'tchange in the near future. 2011 non-conference opponents Eastern Washington Cal Poly Washington (FBS) South Dakota Idaho State Washington State (FBS) BYU (FBS) Western State (Division II) Montana At Tennessee (FBS) Cal Poly Western Oregon (Division II) Montana State Utah (FBS) UC Davis Minot State (Division II move-up) Northern Arizona Arizona (FBS) Southern Utah Fort Lewis (Division II) Northern Colorado Colorado State (FBS) Lindenwood (Division II move-up) North Dakota Portland State TBA Sacramento State Oregon State (FBS) UC Davis TBA Weber State Wyoming (FBS) Utah State (FBS) Southern Utah

The "big brains" might but their alumni and financial supporters won't. Several have said they will no longer donate/attend if they drop back down. Not empty threats, unfortunately.

Idaho's not coming back to FCS anytime soon. They'll play in a heavily-watered-down WAC or even as an independent for a while if they have to rather than allow the perception that they "failed" in their attempt to move to FBS along with Boise State. Now, it was possible they would have joined the BSC for non-football sports IF the WAC had disintegrated, but not for football. There's a FBS-or-bust mentality there right now that would not let it happen. Maybe after many years of independent purgatory, but not now.

Agreed. While I think an annual game (or at least a bi-annual game) with NDSU is good for the state as well as both universities, in some ways I'd just as much like to continue the UND-USD rivalry annually as I would the one with NDSU. The Bison-Sioux rivalry has turned nasty at times (both sides), while the one with USD is hard-fought with vocal fans, between two very similar neighbor-state institutions, but without some of the nastiness. If we can't keep the Sioux name, another trophy could be created, ala the Dakota Marker between SDSU and NDSU.

Next year's schedule is what it is. We'll probably never really know how much effort was expended to get better teams, if the nickname issue played a factor, if ending transition with a winning team was more important than the competition, etc.... I think we make judgments based on 2012 and beyond. I'm guessing, starting then, we'll see 8 conference games, one FBS game, one FCS game against a regional rival (NDSU, USD, UNI, SDSU) and one more, possibly against a DII team. Personally, I'd like to see us play NDSU and USD every year or alternate between them, but when even Montana, Montana State and most of the BSC teams play a DII team I'm guessing you'll see one of them on the schedule from time-to-time. I don't think we can count on Drake much...they're bound to get tired of the beatings they're taking by scholarship FCS teams.

If we're a bubble team when it comes to football playoffs, don't put it past the NCAA to pass us over for another team with an "approved" nickname either.

Is there ANY chance we could see a schedule change that would bring a higher-level team to Alerus instead of Montana Western, Black Hills, or Sioux Falls, or is the schedule locked in? Any chance for a late pick-up or swap? Is Drake the fourth "dog" you reference? Montana Western is actually Parents Weekend. Aaarrrghh.

EWU will be playing the University of Washington in Husky Stadium the week before they come to Vermillion. It might be a good time to catch them.

I think if Kelly and Fasion had used something like the language here in the second quote (even in yesterday's radio interview), this would be easier to accept. Maybe they said it and I'm not aware, but if they appeared to "fight the good fight" and lost, I think most of us would be willing to move on. As it is, it doesn't look like there was much of a fight. Perhaps there was, or perhaps it occurred behind the scenes, but perception is reality sometime.