fightingsioux4life

That is what I have been saying for months.

I agree with you and I think the coaching staff will stock this program with talented kids who have character and positive attitudes and work habits. But that will take a couple of years. I imagine Bubba and his staff will be on the road as soon as the season is over.

While I have a hard time not disliking Ron His Horse Knows More after his slanderous and false comments about UND being a racist and hateful place, even a broken clock is right twice a day. And one of those times was when he suggested Roughriders as a replacement for Fighting Sioux. A good idea is a good idea, even if the originator of that idea is someone you don't like otherwise.

Have you forgotten what a train wreck this program was just two years ago? In football, if you don't have the numbers, if you don't have the depth across the board, you are going to struggle because injuries are inevitable. That is the next challenge for Bubba and company; building depth across the board so that injuries don't destroy an entire season of work. Give this staff another couple of recruiting classes and then you can make some informed judgments on whether we are headed in the right direction. But it's way, way too early to claim that "we'll always be a second rate team" based on what has happened this year.

Man, don't get me started on this. When the old REA closed its doors for good in 2001, it marked the end of one of the best home-ice advantages in college hockey. The new REA will never match that. At least the Betty is similar to Hyslop in terms of atmosphere and home-court advantage.

I am thinking he can't or doesn't want to name his sources.

I was thinking the same thing earlier today! We could make the logo an UAS drone or something. That would be a nice tie-in to the GFAFB.

Well, it does seem to be getting the most hate right now from the non-PC voters.

The obsession over this point is aggravating to say the least. I urge voters to weigh the strengths and weaknesses of each name on the ballot and not base it entirely on who else is using it. Unless we are planning on scheduling GFRR in one of our sports, I don't think it matters. There isn't a single NCAA school who uses Roughriders; that is as unique as we are going to get.

I do not believe RR voters will switch to Nodaks. Nodak voters, however, could be persuaded to switch to RR based on the fact that the original criteria says Nodaks shouldn't even be in the running anymore. And both RR and Nodak voters have a common enemy: Fighting Hawks. I do believe Roughriders has the best chance of preventing Fighting Hawks from winning.

Based on the original criteria, Nodaks shouldn't even be in play anymore.

One way we can end this once and for all is to vote Roughriders and push it over 50%. Otherwise, we'll get stuck with Fighting Hawks off of a plurality (33%+1). And that would be a farce, so much so that this issue may continue to fester and simmer until people start demanding a do-over. And UND doesn't need that nonsense right now.

Too many holes on defense right now and not enough depth to fill them. That will only get better with recruiting the next couple of years.

So you have no problem whatsoever with Kelley changing the rules at the last minute on the flimsy excuse that #2 and #3 are too close together? Whatever floats your boat, I guess. But if pointing that out makes us "whiners", then so be it.

This appears to be happening on this thread, if you look at the voting numbers right now: Fighting Hawks = 7 Roughriders = 25 Nodaks = 6If Roughriders gets over 50% in the run-off because of the bait and switch tactic, I wonder what Kelley will do? Accept the results? Or just ignore them and appoint Fighting Hawks?

I believe the same people eligible in the first round are eligible for the run-off.

The controversy could drive voter turnout up.

You know, this whole snow job by Kelley could backfire if people get mad and vote Roughriders to prevent the consultant's choice of Fighting Hawks from winning. One can only hope.

You mean this guy?

I second this 1000% Go Riders Go!!!

No, I haven't been saying Kelley wants North Stars or Sundogs; those are conspiracy theories that have been thrown around this forum for months now by various other posters. But not me. Think about it: Why else would Kelley change the rules at the last minute to allow three names into the run-off instead of just two and then remove the majority requirement for a name to win? There is obviously some calculating going on behind closed doors. Roughriders was deemed to have a "double-negative meaning" by Mr. Nickname Expert (a.k.a. the consultant). Fighting Hawks, on the other hand, was basically promoted by said consultant and is a safe, PC choice, which Kelley and a lot of Fighting Sioux opponents would approve of. It also would justify the money that UND spent on said consultant. And by including Nodaks, Kelley is inoculating himself from the wrath of the Fighting Sioux Hardliners and the Hockey-Only Crowd from a repeat of the same backlash he got when he didn't include "UND/North Dakota" as an option on the first ballot. I believe that Kelley was afraid of Roughriders winning, so he is changing the rules of the game to get the result he wants, which I believe is Fighting Hawks. He should have just left the rules alone.

I believe this is an underhanded, sneaky attempt to stop Roughriders from winning. I also think Kelley wants Fighting Hawks to win so that the consultant they hired looks like a good investment. Finally, putting Nodaks on the final ballot is throwing a bone to the Fighting Sioux Hardliners and the Hockey-Only crowd so they couldn't scream "conspiracy". Leading by not leading, that's the Kelley way.

This is what I hope people rally around now.

Memphis is turning some heads this year, so Paxton Lynch is going to sneak up on some people both in college and the NFL.

It's a joke, a farce. We need that around here sometimes, especially with all the nickname negativity floating around this forum right now.