UND-FB-FAN

Of course REA did ... Got to love that entitled 52% ...

This is one of many, many inequalities amongst the programs. It doesn't help anyone to be "careful" and caution against criticizing UND's untouchable hockey program. The inequality is so obvious it is disturbing. We shouldn't stand for it just because "UND is UND and hockey is UND". It needs to change some in light of UND's division I aspirations.

His brother is on UND team currently.

Happy about Chaves. Great AD and better man.

This just confirms all the conjecture on this topic previously. UND football is grossly underfunded and I will continue to maintain my stance on this despite what others (mainly hockey goons) have to bitch about. When HPC phase II is funded and construction started maybe I'll step back a bit.

There's no question the current offensive philosophy needs a lot of work. It's far too reliant on a basic inside running game, that quite frankly, when you have average at best offensive linemen, will not work. There needs to be a greater emphasis on the passing game. I'm not saying open this thing up like Sam Houston State does, but the quarterback position and offensive formations/calls associated needs to open up some. People joke that all three RBs should be on the field at the same time; I don't think that's a joke at all. I seriously think an innovative offensive coordinator would find a way to have that happen consistently for UND's offense. Swallow your pride for wanting to be this "basic smash mouth team" that you aren't and actually put a little thought into the offense. The best players need to consistently be on the field. I really question if this offensive staff can do that.

Unfortunately, in this case, public perception is not always the truth. Some things go on behind the scenes that would upset many ignorant to the reality of DI college football.

The coaching staff and program (salaries, facilities w/o HPC phase 2) is mediocre at best right now. It is what it is. I wouldn't put too much stock in this one deflection though.

That's your opinion. Your ability to articulate it surely leaves something to be desired. I personally know several people who have started to taste "chicken salad" after a year of time to digest the reality of the logo and nickname. And, once again, the fact such a divide regarding the nickname/logo even exists is detrimental to UND athletics in general. It's a fight that takes valuable energy away from potentially more focused, unified goals and accomplishments.

UND, as is most of North Dakota and the Midwest, is surrounded by folks who need A LOT of time to digest everything and move on. Traditions run deep. As such, the nickname/logo acceptance and utilization situation really is just a situation that requires more time. I think the process would be expedited if the Ralph Engelstad Arena would showcase the logo and new nickname more, as their implied resistance undoubtedly influences the conservative crowd that denies change. Unfortunately, a large number of the people who dislike the new logo and nickname do so in context of the old logo and nickname, which just isn't coming back. Only time (and subtle influences to soothe the unconscious bias) around the new logo and nickname will change this. A more detailed Fighting Hawks logo would not completely solve the current issue with acceptability and utilization of the new nickname/logo, but it could help. Many would certainly be disgusted with any amount of additional time and money spent on further logo development.

I'll just repeat my previous post because it again applies. Sounds good in theory, but what happens when everybody dislikes the second logo and inevitably has critical things to say about it. There undoubtedly will be people who are in uproar about the costs of adopting a new logo. The subjectivity of logos leaves this really as a no-win situation; at least until general support comes around like it existed in the good ol' days. Continually swapping out logos for something new is not the answer. Perhaps an alternative logo could help.

Man, people just don't care anymore. Apathy has set in.

Sounds good in theory, but what happens when everybody dislikes the second logo and inevitably has critical things to say about it. There undoubtedly will be people who are in uproar about the costs of adopting a new logo. The subjectivity of logos leaves this really as a no-win situation; at least until general support comes around like it existed in the good ol' days.

No, that's not what I meant. I meant exactly what I said. Nice try though. You honestly don't care about UND, despite what you say. This "Everyone who even remotely is associated with UND needs to mindlessly worship the symbol of mediocrity, or a few of us will relentlesly insult them until they do, untill then we all lose." is completely insane and not something I would even slightly word. Despite what you think, the present problem is there is not an overwhelming consensus against the nickname at this point; more people are coming to terms with the nickname all the time. The alternatives of "no nickname" or "Fighting Sioux" aren't options, so what is the true alternative then? Thus, we find ourselves at a crossroads: Do we dump the logo and the progress made or do we continue to market the new logo and nickname and hope more and more people realize general support is what is again needed? If you feel leaving the Fighting Hawks logo/nickname and going through another nickname selection process is the best for the University, you purely do not understand collegiate athletics nor what is best for UND. In fact, as I mentioned earlier, I don't think you could care less about what happens to UND athletics (especially non-hockey) moving forward. As such, I have a hard time even listening to your opinions.

So spite the school, current and future student-athletes and all those who do want to support it? This mindset is troubling. It perfectly expresses the current state of affairs as far as UND support goes. It is certainly less than ideal. There needs to be a consensus amongst UND supporters; until then, we all lose.

Tremendous point; no sense of bias or subjectivity at all with this statement. This answers the mid-field/mid-court logo concerns entirely; please, everyone, cease debate immediately. The fact there is so much division within the fan base regarding the school's sports emphasis and how the logo can't end up on mid-court/mid-field/mid-ice is certainly a concern. This type of divisiveness should not exist to begin with, but, it does and that is a huge issue. It hurts UND athletics. The sooner this is resolved, the sooner we can all be a united fan base (which is normal for collegiate athletics) and actually see UND accomplish big, new DI things.

If that accomplishes #1, I agree.

A few times this year? ... how about 10 to 15 times each game? Such a concept is not wild in this current era of spread out football; it is taboo for Rudolph and UND football, though (?). Concept: put speed (Santiago) in space (out wide) and power in backfield (Oliviera, Johannesson).

Rudolph Eureka Moment ... and many wins

#1 - Financial distributions should at least be 50/50 but preferably more of a split in favor of The University of North Dakota (e.g., 60/40 UND). REA does not need majority (52%) of ticket revenue (that's DII line of thinking). #2 - Put the damn Fighting Hawk logo on mid-court and stop avoiding that inevitable image.

Sell on both. Too many backfield options plus questionable offensive line. No dominant receiver capable of 1000 yard season plus not enough emphasis on passing game. Could see three rushers all over 500 or two over 800 a piece though, which would be fine with how UND wants to play ball.

You are so biased that your perception is completely incompatible with reality. You, whether you identify with it or not, are a stereotypical "hockey-only fan".

Dress there? No. The Alerus Center has an above average locker room for the football team to use on gamedays. That Alerus Center locker room could be improved but the focus is definitely the locker rooms used for practice at Memorial; they are no good at all. Coaches offices and meeting rooms are way behind there also. HPC phase II includes new locker room, meeting rooms, and coaches offices, all of which are desperately needed relative to what top MVFC programs have. The UND hockey program has no issues with this currently, as we know with the current upgrades. How can "UND fans" be this clueless about the current #1 UND AD fundraising goal if they truthfully care about more than just hockey? To help in explanation, imagine the old Ralph still standing for the hockey team to practice in and the coaches to have offices in, and the new REA being used only for games. I think the "hockey folks" would be real upset awfully quick.

Or the REA came online in 2001 ...

Get your head out of the sand.