streetsahead
-
Posts
436 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by streetsahead
-
-
I guess the question is was this for sale prior to Trey Lance declaring for the draft?
-
4 minutes ago, gundy1124 said:
I have some insight on this topic. While on the game day committee I had a substantial commitment ($$) to make and give away free replica jerseys, kid sizes. I had 5-6 key players picked out. This was the year following the Hawk-erchiefs.(also donated funds, didn't cost the University anything). So, I had the kid jerseys all mocked up and ready to go and enough funds for hundreds of jerseys.(close to 500)
The response was I could only do the number 1 and the last 2 digits of the year. I think it was 2017, so #17 was OK. The reason was an NCAA statute that a University cannot profit off of a name or 'likeness' to a player. (apparently number 1 and 17 are not real players that year) I know it is so stupid but when challenged I was told the University staff will take the laziest approach possible. Saying "no" to football is easy and is zero risk to the University. At that time I showed UND how many other colleges had player jerseys, with players that you could make a profit off of and UNDs response was they would report it to the NCAA.
But, the story continues............since I love rules I ordered a #22 for my fast daughter(Santiago), #5 for my strongest daughter(Brady), #92 for my boy that likes to run into things(Tank), and #45 for my boy named Kolt(Cam at that time). I took all my kids to an autograph/meet the players and those players totally freaked out (in a good way), even wanting pictures on their own phones to show friends and family. The players thought it was the coolest thing, saying "I've never seen a kid wear my jersey"!! John and Brady spent 10 minutes with my girls. Players were letting my 4 year old with Tank's jersey tackle them.
Interesting. And that's another good point - I'm sure that any player would love seeing kids wearing his number. Seems like a copout on the part of the university. I thought with hockey that you just couldn't do name and number together for active players, but I could be wrong.
-
3 minutes ago, zonadub said:
This is exactly what I'm talking about. There should be readily available replica jerseys that actually look like what is worn on the field.
-
1
-
2
-
-
I wonder if they'll sell decent replicas of these that aren't just number 1. That's an area that's been lacking for a number of years now. I would think with Adidas it wouldn't be hard to get replica jerseys to sell (like hockey).
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, OgieOgilthorpe said:
Wow that’s great news. This is the first legitimate new business moving to GF that I’ve seen in quite a long time. Hopefully there are more drone companies to follow.
I can’t read the article so can someone tell me how many employees are expected?
It didn't say. I was curious about that as well. We'll see if there's any follow-up.
-
Drone manufacturer moving to GF.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Oxbow6 said:
Active cases down by over 100 in ND. Hospitalizations stable. One death that was determined to be 3/5th Covid19 related.
Well played.
-
33 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:
Informative thread on the timeline here.
Very informative. I saw this earlier. I decided against posting it here because I figured i'd get lambasted for posting something from the New York Times.....
-
Anyone know anything about the Valley Dairy stores being rebranded as Marathon?
-
4 minutes ago, Hayduke1 said:
There is plenty of information on his website. His record of public service stretches out for decades.
As far as public articulation, it blows my mind that supporters of the orange dip@#$t would want any comparison at all.
But, hey.
Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.
Lol
The bonus points for getting them in the correct order could really be a major factor here.
-
1 hour ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:
Not "anti-mask" so much as "anti-mask mandate."
Just like any other subset of the human race with whom you happen to disagree, we don't need your understanding. We just want your tolerance.
Mandates and brow-beating are hardly the way forward. Let people decide for themselves, and rest easy knowing that pre-mandate, you already had upwards of 60% or more voluntary mask compliance. That significantly reduces the risk of spread. Why is that not good enough?
Wear a mask. Shop at stores that require masks. If you see me coming, tighten your mask, cross the street. Whatever. Won't hurt my feelings a bit. Just stop the incessant nagging, admit that you have zero idea about me and my character or whether I take unnecessary risks with friends and loved ones, quit trying to flex your faux moral superiority, and mix in some basic human decency and respect for your fellow man.
I think the disconnect comes from the fact that if you accept the premise that the masks are not to protect you but to protect everyone else from your respiratory droplets, etc then letting people decide for themselves undermines the whole idea. And I understand that you may not accept that premise and there has been lots of contradictory information presented regarding the efficacy of masks and why they should or shouldn't be used. I'm just saying I think that's the reason maskers are so upset with anti-maskers and vice-versa (for lack of better terms). There's just a fundamental disconnect.
-
3
-
-
I'm glad they could get it rescheduled for next year. Halloween party in Nashville!
-
1
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, KS SIOUX said:
Who sent that email?
-
2 minutes ago, 1972 said:
let me try to explain this one more time....n95 mask will protect the person wearing them, but does nothing to protect the general public. they are designed to filter air intake, and have a valve in them to completely expell exhausted air. so if you have covid, and are wearing an n95 mask in public, you are not doing anything
Not all of them have valves.
-
This thread is the CHAZ of the siouxsports forum.
-
13 hours ago, Cratter said:
I guess this means there will be very few fans allowed at the Ralph this year too?
I think that's the elephant in the room. You look at what's going on with the NBA and NHL and their bubbles and the fact that a few NFL teams are allowing fans to roll over their season tickets for a year and it doesn't look promising for college athletics having fans present.
-
Now for some levity - my initial reading of this headline had me prepared for a much different article:
-
9 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:
I don't mind them as a second OT, but completely scrapping the normal 5x5x5 OT bothers me a bit.
They seem to be more worried about the length of the games than anything else. Otherwise extending the 5 on 5 OT to 10 minutes would have been better.
-
3
-
-
My is still on the floor in my garage awaiting a use. Plan to use it in a basement bar somehow in our next house.
-
13 hours ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:
casey's is great!...mike's casey's and happy joes are the best in town. pete za is good and up north too
Have you had Boss' yet? It's pretty good but definitely on the spendy side. And i'm an unabashed huge Popolino's fan as far as my favorite in town.
-
2 minutes ago, nd1sufan said:
There is an out for the FBS teams to only pay travel expenses for a situation like this if both teams agree to it. They would not have to pay the guarantee if fans were limited or not allowed.
Oh ok. That makes sense.
-
1 hour ago, nd1sufan said:
I don’t think the NDSU/Oregon game has been cancelled yet. The gov of Oregon said attendance would be limited at all events through Sept. could mean no or limited fans. Could still be played. Not predicting it will be, but there is a chance.
It seems like these FBS teams won't be in a hurry to pay out the guarantees if they aren't getting any gate revenue though. But there's always a chance.
-
15 minutes ago, NDSU grad said:
My main concern with the masks is that people will feel they don’t have to social distance while wearing one. IMO social distancing will have a much greater effect of reducing transmission than wearing a mask.
I agree though. I think the masks give people a false sense of security.
-
10 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:
We're inching closer to having two economies: a mask-required one and a mask-free one. People can speak with their wallets, and I have to wonder how long the mask-required businesses will hold out if a sufficient number of people flock to the others.
I've seen nothing that would cause me to wear a mask 99% of the time, but if a particular transaction is essential to me, I may bite the bullet. But that thing is coming off the millisecond it is no longer "required." And I will go out of my way to shop mask-free, if that's what it comes to.
Just out of curiosity, what's the main issue for you here? Do you not buy that wearing a mask would prevent you from spreading the virus if you had it? Or are you just assuming you don't have it and don't care? The mask thing really only works if everyone buys in and it seems like we're clearly not there.
I'm not trying to be snarky here i'm just legitimately curious about your rationale. Even if it's not required I've been wearing them when shopping and will likely continue to do so for the time being. But maybe i'm being too naive/cautious. I don't know.
-
1
-
2020-21 University of North Dakota Hockey Season
in Men's Hockey
Posted
Hell, I'd be fine with Holden and Starman.