UND, NDSU, & the Legislature

[mksioux]

I agree. If nothing else, Faison should have picked up the phone and called Gene by now for PR purposes. PICK UP THE PHONE BRIAN!

Maybe it does start with the Presidents, I don't know. But still, the AD's have to be able to talk in order for the game to happen, don't they?

Yep. Faison should call Taylor if he hasn't. Even though it appears Taylor has dug in his heels, there's no reason not to call and try to establish some sort of relationship.

[UND-1]

Your post was good for a laugh! I didn't see you so worried about not playing us in 04-08? What happened? Now the shoes on the other foot and you don't like it. Too bad! I wouldn't worry about our attendence I'd worry about a 3 game home schedule with SFU as one of them and SFU again in 2011. Faison panicked, face it. The BIG picture is your transition isn't going so well and to deflect attention away from it your administration is crying it's not FAIR that we can't play NDSU. Sad....

I love your posts-all the same. We are 6 months in to the transition and you repeatedly state how the "transition isn't going well". If this situation "isn't going all that well" ---you better hope it doesn't get better for NDSU's sake.

I just wish that one time NDSU fans would go back and look at their schedules and results in Year 1 of the transition.

[Dagger]

Somebody please help me out. Hasn't UND been willing to play NDSU for quite some time. It seems like Bunning was trying to get the game too. I don't think UND just started this idea. Anyway were we not willing to play NDSU from 2004 to 2008? I could be wrong. I'm sure somebody knows the answer to the question.

[mksioux]

Colorado and Iowa also have legislation to force the two state schools to play each other.

New Mexico, Utah and South Carolina are some other states where the big state schools play each other every year even though they are in different conferences (not sure if there is state legislation or not).

So the precedent is most certainly there.

I don't mind the idea. I would rather see UND on the 09 schedule than the 2012 schedule.

If NDSU needs to wait a few years and then schedule the first couple games in Fargo before re-establishing the alternating schedule, there would be no reason for the Legislature to step in. The problem is that Taylor is saying that, even after 2012, he is not willing to resume the rivalry on an annual and alternating basis. If that continues to be NDSU's stance, you can expect that the Legislature is eventually going to step in and force it. Maybe not this session, but as long as that is NDSU's position, this will continue to come up.

Should government get into the business of athletic scheduling? Of course not. But governments routinely get into the business of things they have no business getting into. Given the fact that these are both state institutions and petty differences and hard feelings are negatively impacting the economics of one of them, it's not a huge stretch for the state government to get involved at some point.

[DI IN FARGO]

You don't have to do much math to realize that, of course, the game now is more important to UND than NDSU. MVFC=9. Great West=5. But NDSU struggled through without the game and UND will, too, if need be.

I agree, the legislature has more important issues to deal with and I'm sure they'll get around to them. This won't take much time. The filing of the bill was more about publicity than legislation, and that goal has already been reached, as evidenced by the local newspapers/newscasts.

I'm not sure I buy the notion that playing UND is a "net negative' for NDSU when you compare the price of FSC guarantees vs a biennial bus trip to Grand Forks plus a huge statewide TV audience annually. But even if it is, what does that do to the NDSU argument that the teams would still be playing if only UND had agreed to continue when NDSU jumped divisions? Would the economics, as interpreted by Gene Taylor, be any different today?

I understand you don't want the schools to play. If I venture into Bisonville, a lot of your buds there don't, either. But while zealots like you and me dig our heels in, a lot of sports fans from across the state are cheated out of a game that was viewed as one of the premiere sports/social events of the year. I'm not sure how those fans view the argument coming from NDSU, located in "Imperial Cass County," that the schools won't play in football because NDSU can make more money elsewhere.

You know I've seen this comment before so many times "Imperial Cass County" yet the primary sponsors of this bill are from El Forko Grande. Seems to me that the people trying to impose their will on this subject come from your own backyard. Also seems to me that this "if I can't get my way I'll force the issue in the news media" comes from a mindset of people who are trying to impose their will over other people who don't agree with them. Who has the high and mighty attitude? I think that question was answered by looking at the sponsors of the ridiculous legislation.

[mksioux]

Somebody please help me out. Hasn't UND been willing to play NDSU for quite some time. It seems like Bunning was trying to get the game too. I don't think UND just started this idea. Anyway were we not willing to play NDSU from 2004 to 2008? I could be wrong. I'm sure somebody knows the answer to the question.

I can't find the story, but I believe it was in 2006 when Buning said he wanted to start scheduling NDSU again.

[Matt]

Given the fact that these are both state institutions and petty differences and hard feelings are negatively impacting the economics of one of them, it's not a huge stretch for the state government to get involved at some point

.

Are we now ready to concede this point, or will the money come in one way or another (some other UND home game)?

I'm not sure how those fans view the argument coming from NDSU, located in "Imperial Cass County," that the schools won't play in football because NDSU can make more money elsewhere.

There's so many new people from all over the country living in Fargo, that label is meaningless to many, and those who are born and raised here wear it with as a badge of honor. Attempting to shame Cass residents into putting pressure on NDSU is a non-starter.

[SooToo]

You know I've seen this comment before so many times "Imperial Cass County" yet the primary sponsors of this bill are from El Forko Grande. Seems to me that the people trying to impose their will on this subject come from your own backyard. Also seems to me that this "if I can't get my way I'll force the issue in the news media" comes from a mindset of people who are trying to impose their will over other people who don't agree with them. Who has the high and mighty attitude? I think that question was answered by looking at the sponsors of the ridiculous legislation.

Hey, I'm not making accusations about "Imperial Cass," just pointing out the perception exists. (Little confession here; I live in Cass County.) Stating publicly that NDSU doesn't need the game and implying it will only happen in Fargo probably rubs a lot of North Dakotans, many of whom already view Fargo/Cass County as elitist, the wrong way.

As for "people trying to impose their will," this issue has been neck deep in "politics" for years now on both sides.

[tjbison]

Gene Taylor has made it EXTREMELY clear he has no interest in playing the game. He keeps coming up with various twists on why they can't play the game. When the President's of the two institutions are able to come to terms the game will happen. Faison doesn't need to kiss Taylor's butt. Taylor as much as said he would only play UND in Fargo. He said their non conference games have to be large payoff games. Apparently the game will never happen then. UND would NEVER just play that game in Fargo. Taylor and Chapman need to wake up an smell the roses. Apparently they just can't see the big picture. There is a lot MORE THAN MONEY to be gained in the playing of that game. If NDSU has a couple more disappointing .500 seasons they won't have to worry about sellouts in Fargo anymore. They will be begging for the Bison Sioux rivalry. When the Bison were 2 and 8 a few years ago they could shoot a cannon through the Fargodome. With the talent NDSU lost this year and were only a .500 team they could be very ordinary next year. I'm starting to think they truly are afraid to play us. If they lost they would have a lot of crow to eat. Bring them on.

Kinda like some of the UND fans?? I find it funny that after one season of 10 games with crap home schedule, the UND backers push a bill to FORCE at least one quality game a year for the Sioux fans, as much as you guys don't like to admit it playing NDSU a top 25 team for the past several years benefits UND more than NDSU, as our regular season conference schedule brings in top 25 teams without begging! Go ahead and make fun of our .500 season but UND would have had 1 win in the MVFC last year, and ISU-B might have even pulled that one off!

I could only imagine what would have been said in 04 if NDSU fans sponsored a bill to Force UND to play NDSU during their transition!!

[MplsBison]

If NDSU needs to wait a few years and then schedule the first couple games in Fargo before re-establishing the alternating schedule, there would be no reason for the Legislature to step in. The problem is that Taylor is saying that, even after 2012, he is not willing to resume the rivalry on an annual and alternating basis. If that continues to be NDSU's stance, you can expect that the Legislature is eventually going to step in and force it. Maybe not this session, but as long as that is NDSU's position, this will continue to come up.

Should government get into the business of athletic scheduling? Of course not. But governments routinely get into the business of things they have no business getting into. Given the fact that these are both state institutions and petty differences and hard feelings are negatively impacting the economics of one of them, it's not a huge stretch for the state government to get involved at some point.

I agree fully.

If UND isn't on NDSU's schedule every year starting by 2012, then the state will have to force them until UND gets into the MVFC.

[UND-1]

Kinda like some of the UND fans?? I find it funny that after one season of 10 games with crap home schedule, the UND backers push a bill to FORCE at least one quality game a year for the Sioux fans, as much as you guys don't like to admit it playing NDSU a top 25 team for the past several years benefits UND more than NDSU, as our regular season conference schedule brings in top 25 teams without begging! Go ahead and make fun of our .500 season but UND would have had 1 win in the MVFC last year, and ISU-B might have even pulled that one off!

I could only imagine what would have been said in 04 if NDSU fans sponsored a bill to Force UND to play NDSU during their transition!!

That doesn't make alot of sense because by the time UND gets NDSU at home it would be 2011 and scheduling woes would be a thing of the past. As we all know the first two games would probably be at the Fargodome, which would be just fine with UND and its fans.

(...and way to compare last years Bison team to our first year transition team that just got 58 scholarships for the first year. Takes real balls to do that).

[mksioux]

Are we now ready to concede this point, or will the money come in one way or another (some other UND home game)?

I don't know whether UND will be able to consistently fill its schedule, but it's become painfully obvious that the schedule is going to be a constant struggle and UND is going to badly need home games every year for the foreseeable future. But even if UND can scrape by and fill its home schedules against random DIII and NAIA schools, is it really in dispute that a guaranteed sell-out (with increased tickets prices) every other year against your in-state 100+ year archrival would be economically better than an annual home $60k guarantee game against a random NAIA school in front of 5,000 fans? Not to mention the non-gate economic factors an annual UND-NDSU game would generate.

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

All those out there who are fuming about the state getting involved in UND/NDSU football, take a hike. The state runs these outfits and they can do whatever the heck they want to with them as far as I am concerned. If you do not want the state scheduling games, make the schools private.

[Matt]

All those out there who are fuming about the state getting involved in UND/NDSU football, take a hike. The state runs these outfits and they can do whatever the heck they want to with them as far as I am concerned. If you do not want the state scheduling games, make the schools private.

How can you possibly post that statement and still believe in "empower the taxpayer"? If athletic scheduling is now under legislative power, then what exactly is not within their power? How about hiring and firing? Should Potter et al then have approval on who gets the athletic director job in the first place if they are now directing individual tasks within that job? What about other duties of the AD like athletic dept staff? Coaches? Setting affordable ticket pricing? Concession stands?

Pardon me for yelling at my computer but...LEGISLATORS HAVE A JOB OF THEIR OWN TO DO! THEIR LOCUS OF CONTROL ABSOLUTELY SHOULD NOT INCLUDE ANY OF THE DUTIES OF THE ATHLETIC DIRECTORS OF ANY OF THE UNIVERSITIES IN NORTH DAKOTA!!!

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

How can you possibly post that statement and still believe in "empower the taxpayer"? If athletic scheduling is now under legislative power, then what exactly is not within their power? How about hiring and firing? Should Potter et al then have approval on who gets the athletic director job in the first place if they are now directing individual tasks within that job? What about other duties of the AD like athletic dept staff? Coaches? Setting affordable ticket pricing? Concession stands?

Pardon me for yelling at my computer but...LEGISLATORS HAVE A JOB OF THEIR OWN TO DO! THEIR LOCUS OF CONTROL ABSOLUTELY SHOULD NOT INCLUDE ANY OF THE DUTIES OF THE ATHLETIC DIRECTORS OF ANY OF THE UNIVERSITIES IN NORTH DAKOTA!!!

I'll pardon you! I am just as passionate as you. But think about it. The schools are funded by the state and ran by the state. There for, whatever the state says, goes. If it were my choice, I would do away with all forms of public education.

[DI IN FARGO]

How can you possibly post that statement and still believe in "empower the taxpayer"? If athletic scheduling is now under legislative power, then what exactly is not within their power? How about hiring and firing? Should Potter et al then have approval on who gets the athletic director job in the first place if they are now directing individual tasks within that job? What about other duties of the AD like athletic dept staff? Coaches? Setting affordable ticket pricing? Concession stands?

Pardon me for yelling at my computer but...LEGISLATORS HAVE A JOB OF THEIR OWN TO DO! THEIR LOCUS OF CONTROL ABSOLUTELY SHOULD NOT INCLUDE ANY OF THE DUTIES OF THE ATHLETIC DIRECTORS OF ANY OF THE UNIVERSITIES IN NORTH DAKOTA!!!

Matt you are correct. The other poster is way off base and is either in a drunken stupor or just plain stupid.

[Matt]

I'll pardon you! I am just as passionate as you. But think about it. The schools are funded by the state and ran by the state. There for, whatever the state says, goes. If it were my choice, I would do away with all forms of public education.

You know that's not true. State employees have specific job descriptions that, for the most part, limit power. However, in the case of the legislature, they do have far reaching tentacles that can have significant influence over a lot of different areas. I don't disagree that the legislature can do this thing. I am confident it would not pass should it even come up for a vote. However, if NDSU can show it doesn't have an opening until 2012, what then? Will this come up every year? Will NDSU's desire for a big road payday like UND's game at TTU, be a valid reason for not playing at UND? Therefore, could the legislature force NDSU to accept an economic penalty by passing on a FBS road game in order to play at UND? An interesting irony don't you think, when part of this argument is the economic penalty UND is getting for being denied the home NDSU game? I want to see these teams play, even if it is on an irregular basis, but I won't sell out my principles for it. The legislature needs to stay away from this.

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

You know that's not true. State employees have specific job descriptions that, for the most part, limit power. However, in the case of the legislature, they do have far reaching tentacles that can have significant influence over a lot of different areas. I don't disagree that the legislature can do this thing. I am confident it would not pass should it even come up for a vote. However, if NDSU can show it doesn't have an opening until 2012, what then? Will this come up every year? Will NDSU's desire for a big road payday like UND's game at TTU, be a valid reason for not playing at UND? Therefore, could the legislature force NDSU to accept an economic penalty by passing on a FBS road game in order to play at UND? An interesting irony don't you think, when part of this argument is the economic penalty UND is getting for being denied the home NDSU game? I want to see these teams play, even if it is on an irregular basis, but I won't sell out my principles for it. The legislature needs to stay away from this.

I am not selling my principles. This would be a non issue if the government would stay out of things they have no business being in. Why is it the state should stay out of this? UND and NDSU are state entities. There for, the state can set most any requirement of them they want. Like I said, I do not believe the state should be involved in education at all. Or sports. But unless you agree with me on that, then you can not say the state should not be in the UND/NDSU football game.

[tony]

I am not selling my principles. This would be a non issue if the government would stay out of things they have no business being in. Why is it the state should stay out of this? UND and NDSU are state entities. There for, the state can set most any requirement of them they want. Like I said, I do not believe the state should be involved in education at all. Or sports. But unless you agree with me on that, then you can not say the state should not be in the UND/NDSU football game.

Um, the state legislature should stay out of this and leave it to the SBoHE - if any state body gets involved with this, it should be the Board (and I'd argue that it's not even the Board's business - just like they never should have gotten involved in the nickname issue).

Anyway, if you are old enough to remember when the legislature micro-managed UND and NDSU and all the parochialism that plagued the system back then, you might be singing a different tune. If the state legislature hadn't ceded authority to the SBoHE, I'm pretty sure that NDSU and UND would have enrollments under 10,000 and research budgets smaller (in real dollars) than they were 20 years ago.

[star2city]

However, if NDSU can show it doesn't have an opening until 2012, what then? Will this come up every year? Will NDSU's desire for a big road payday like UND's game at TTU, be a valid reason for not playing at UND? Therefore, could the legislature force NDSU to accept an economic penalty by passing on a FBS road game in order to play at UND? An interesting irony don't you think, when part of this argument is the economic penalty UND is getting for being denied the home NDSU game?

I'm not in favor of the legislature getting involved, but the argument that NDSU will be punished economically by playing UND is weak, to say the least. Playing UND does not preclude them from an FBS game in any year - it just makes their schedule more difficult without an Austin Peay or C. Conn St as a home game. For Taylor to say his schedule is full through 2012 is also disingenuous, as at last word, he was still looking for opponents for all three years.

Schools routinely charge more for rival games: a UND-Minnesota hockey ticket is $40 vs $30 for Bucky or DU vs $25 for others. NDSU could easily gross 50% more in single-game sales and simultaneously raise the season ticket prices (and maintain their existing season base) if a UND game was on the schedule. NDSU could easily add nearly $150,000 more in revenue (16,000 non-student tickets x $ 9 / ticket increase in the UND game, season ticket price ) from UND than any other sold-out opponent. The bottom line is that an NDSU-UND game, with unlimited seating capacity, would have a 30,000 ticket demand (if for no other reason UND fans) for the first year, even if both teams were winless.

[Matt]

I am not selling my principles. This would be a non issue if the government would stay out of things they have no business being in. Why is it the state should stay out of this? UND and NDSU are state entities. There for, the state can set most any requirement of them they want. Like I said, I do not believe the state should be involved in education at all. Or sports. But unless you agree with me on that, then you can not say the state should not be in the UND/NDSU football game.

I believe in limiting the scope of government. IMHO, athletic scheduling of state universities should be left in the hands of the people hired to do that task-the athletic directors. If they are not doing that task to the satisfaction of their superiors, there is a process to replace that person with someone else. None of that goes as high up the chain of command as the legislature. Beyond that, you and I will agree to disagree.

[MplsBison]

Regarding the state's management of the schools: there is no such slippery slope as you're trying to make us believe.

The involvement would be limited exactly to forcing the rivalry game. That's it. Nothing more.

And there is great precedent already set in other states as I already posted.

There is no possible argument against the state's involvement in this issue.

[Matt]

Regarding the state's management of the schools: there is no such slippery slope as you're trying to make us believe.

The involvement would be limited exactly to forcing the rivalry game. That's it. Nothing more.

And there is great precedent already set in other states as I already posted.

There is no possible argument against the state's involvement in this issue.

And here I've been thinking, and opining, and writing, and articulating, and reading quotes and opinions from the people involved...and all any of us really needed...was your proclamation. Thank you, sire. I've been wasting my time.

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

There is no possible argument against the state's involvement in this issue.

Thank you.

[Shawn-O]

There is no possible argument against the state's involvement in this issue.

If I were still a taxpayer up there I'd be pissed. Surely there are more important matters to spend time and energy on than this? Rome is freaking burning...but I guess times are really that good up there....