IowaBison

"Beginning with 2007-2008, we will engage in an official NCAA

I thought of that too, but it doesn't seem to be the reason. It would be fantastic if UND could get another school (or three) to move with them.

not moving anything. NDSU delayed the move to give other schools the opportunity to assess their situation in the hopes they would move. To declare that you are moving DI and simultaneously declare that you will wait to begin the exploratory year because you need to study the issue further, which is the entire point of the exploratory year, is CRAZY! If you're not sure, but want to study the issue further-declare '06-'07 your exploratory year. If you are sure, but want to study the issue further-declare '06-'07 your exploratory year. If UND waits until '07-'08 for their exploratory year all they will have done is lost a year, in my opinion.

will I literally die, probably not. will it be one of the funniest things I've heard of in a long time, yes (and I don't mean ha-ha funny)

1) UND has held press conferences before to announce what they 'weren't going to do' 2) If the announcement comes as some of you believe it will, announce pseudo-move today/delay exploratory year to '07-'08, (which is the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while), I think I'll die laughing.

I know a lot of folks, especially Sioux Fans are champing at the bit, but I agree with the findings fo the Task Force report that states that a rigorous financial analysis of classification is necessary, ie another year of 'study'. Imagine if UND would have hired a consultant to get a professional, objective, third-party opinion and had its athletic department work on DII and DI budgets instead of wasting its time writing a very long and relatively poor paper on the differences between the classifications-you'd probably have a go or no-go decision being made. Anybody ever think that Kupchella is just stalling?

with all due respect, what the hell is an 'internal Division 1 move"? I don't see the latter part of your post as a "change of events", but rather as the logical next step in the process.

that's incorrect. nowhere did I confuse the NDUS with NDSU. see the above post.

1. Sioux-cia stated that the thread has nothing to do with UND. 2. SiouxMD stated that is does.

Don't need to slow down at all. The NDUS Chancellor has threatened to quit if the NDSU President doesn't get in line. Seems like a story that has something to do with that school in Fargo. nice try, though.

Here ya go Sioux-cia.

IIRC, the contract given to UND would have continued the rivalry for four more years, continuing the same rotation: Fargo-GF-Fargo-GF. The D2 playoff considerations were definitely a factor. I'm glad to see that rule has changed, somewhat-though they are still screwed up big time in D2.

No problem. I don't like holier-than-thou types either.

Do you remember the the Simpsons episode (I believe it's Krusty gets Kancelled) where there is a crazy old man singing, "That old gray mare she ain't what she used to be." DaveK-you're the crazy man If you took a minute to read my posts, both separately, and in the context of the thread in which they are posted you might be able to be part of an on-going conversation on a number of topics of interest to UND-possibly by presenting evidence and argument to pick apart one of them. Instead, you see that a poster supports the Bison, ignore their post and go off on a tangent. You want to talk about being judgemental, you read that I am religious (which I brought up in response to a very good hypothetical by PCM) and refer to a judgemental and condescending religious stereotype.

Gotha, thanks for the clarification.

Did you mean that 'he's ever written'?

You might not, but I wonder if Buning does?

Imagine that, a guy posting on a sports message board having an opinion and imagine fans of a formal rival finding him condescending-heaven forbid!

They will definitely play. I wouldn't be surprised if NDSU declined to play them during their transition or tried to negotiate a 2 for 1.

1. I wouldn't go to your book discussion because I think the conversation would end up being out of your league. 2. No problem with those. 3. That was a horrible movie and yes, I was offended in that case. Being blasphemous for the sake of blasphemy should be offensive to anyone who holds anything sacred.

Was that directed at me? Have you read any of my posts on this thread?

I'm very religious. I wouldn't be caught dead in a tongue-in-cheek anti-religious anything.

Me, no. (You definitely got the wrong guy PCM.)

Would any of you guys go to a tongue-in-check party with a Nazi motif?

I don't know if I go quite that far, what tells me, in conjunction with everything else, was that Ralph was human (somewhere in the gray with the rest of us). Too many folks try to paint others, Ralph in this case, as prostitutes or Madonnas.