The Sicatoka Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Sicatoka you're jealousy is so obvious. Was the 06 MN team bad too. 6-5 went to a bowl game. We controlled just about the whole game with them before falling short on the score. Brought more than 20,000 fans down to the dome twice, great time by all. You can poo poo the 07 MN team all you want but the fact is we beat a BIG 10 football team, something the Sioux might never do. I watched Minnesota go OT, at home, against a MAC school. (There's an hour of my life I'll never get back.) And I knew that NDSU beat a MAC team and that NDSU got very close to Minnesota the year before. Going in to the NDSU game, here are the Minnesota 2007 results: DATE OPPONENT W/L SCORE ATTEND ------------ ------------------------ --- ----- ------ Sep. 1, 2007 BOWLING GREEN LOT 31-32 49253 Sep. 8, 2007 MIAMI (OHIO) W OT 41-35 45383 Sep 15, 2007 at Florida Atlantic L 39-42 10759 *Sep 22, 2007 PURDUE L 31-45 47483 *Sep 29, 2007 #8 OHIO STATE L 7-30 51611 *Oct 06, 2007 at Indiana L 20-40 32009 *Oct 13, 2007 at Northwestern LOT 48-49 23314[/code] They went on to ... [code] Oct 20, 2007 NORTH DAKOTA STATE L 21-27 63088 *Oct 27, 2007 at #19 Michigan L 10-34 109432 *Nov 03, 2007 ILLINOIS L 17-44 46604 *Nov 10, 2007 at Iowa L 16-21 70585 *Nov 17, 2007 #24 WISCONSIN L 34-41 59116 YES, NDSU was the favorite, on the road, for that game. That's a compliment. Can't you accept it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MplsBison Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 It would be a lot easier if you just posted the line for that game. My guess is they still had MN up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 It would be a lot easier if you just posted the line for that game. My guess is they still had MN up. Do I have to hold another "Vegas Line 101" training session? Apparently. The Vegas line is *not* based on who they think will win. The Vegas line is set to try to get roughly equal betting action on both sides. This allows Vegas to merely take the loser's money (minus the Vegas handle) and hand it over to the winners. If they didn't do this they'd have to reach into their own pockets to make payout (and that doesn't happen). Say in college FB last year Florida is going to play Valparaiso. Easy, Florida, right? Everyone wants to bet Florida to win. So Vegas starts to give points to Valpo to try to equalize the action (more on Valpo, less on Florida). Vegas gives points until there's roughly equal action (total dollars bet) on the teams. And Vegas makes their money by taking a percent of the total handle no matter who wins (because the total dollar flow either way should be about equal). Vegas had to give NDSU points to counter-act all of the folks (Minnesota alumni primarily I'd guess) looking to bet on a Big 10 team against an FCS team (with a far smaller alumni/wagering base). Hence, no question the line would show Minnesota as favored (to balance out the smaller number of folks looking to bet on NDSU). The better question is this: How many people gambling, not on emotion, but to make money, took NDSU *and* got points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND-1 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 The offshore line came out late on the Friday before the game and it was NDSU -6. The line moved minimallly which said volumes about what they thought was going to happen. You would think people were going to hammer the +6 for a Big 10 team vs. a FCS team but they didn't. Also, it tells you how good they thought the Gophers were that year. The score: NDSU 27-21. Those oddsmakers are kind of smart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MplsBison Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Do I have to hold another "Vegas Line 101" training session? Apparently. The Vegas line is *not* based on who they think will win. The Vegas line is set to try to get roughly equal betting action on both sides. This allows Vegas to merely take the loser's money (minus the Vegas handle) and hand it over to the winners. If they didn't do this they'd have to reach into their own pockets to make payout (and that doesn't happen). Say in college FB last year Florida is going to play Valparaiso. Easy, Florida, right? Everyone wants to bet Florida to win. So Vegas starts to give points to Valpo to try to equalize the action (more on Valpo, less on Florida). Vegas gives points until there's roughly equal action (total dollars bet) on the teams. And Vegas makes their money by taking a percent of the total handle no matter who wins (because the total dollar flow either way should be about equal). Vegas had to give NDSU points to counter-act all of the folks (Minnesota alumni primarily I'd guess) looking to bet on a Big 10 team against an FCS team (with a far smaller alumni/wagering base). Hence, no question the line would show Minnesota as favored (to balance out the smaller number of folks looking to bet on NDSU). The better question is this: How many people gambling, not on emotion, but to make money, took NDSU *and* got points. Ok then, Minnesota was favored to win the game. You could've saved yourself a lot of trouble by just posting the actual numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coach daddy Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 And you go into every Sioux game that you're not the favorite and mark it down as a loss? I remember when we went DI you all said we wouldn't win this or that but we have proved most of you wrong. Until I see MN going head to head with Ohio State and being in the game I like our chances just fine with them. (remember App State and Mich.) Since your so objective what's on tap next year for the Sioux with a full DI schedule? If you call what we have a "full" DI schedule, we'll be fine. We won't beat Texas Tech in Lubbock (neither would NDSU, in 06, 07, 08, or any year for that matter). I like our chances against Sioux Falls though. They are an NAIA champ but I think, at home, we can take them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krangodance Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 We can both sit here and argue about who dominated the 80's (bison), who dominated the 90's (sioux), who has the premiere hockey (sioux), who has broken some ground with mens basketball (bison). BUT, truth is, neither one of us mean sh*t to the rest of the schools out there as far as schools from north dakota in DI. You guys can sit here and blow all you want about hockey, but it doesn't mean anything. Just talk to some montana fans about DI hockey, you will get laughed at. Truth is, both schools need to step up and prove themselves in what counts, FOOTBALL. Atleast at our level. Retire the Nickel if that is what it takes, make a new trophy, but we need to renew the rivalry, and 1 of us needs to do something. We sucked last year, probably will this year, but so do you. We got dominated by SDSU 2 years in a row, and you guys got your *ss handed to you by GVSU how many years in a row, maybe they kicked you out of DII? I'm sick of the arguing. great post. not a great post. oh no, montana doesn't respect college hockey! what will we ever do? weak. there are 59 d1 college hockey teams in the nation. that's more teams than in any professional sports league. the sioux hockey team has consistently been among the best teams in d1 college hockey for decades now. you compete against teams in your league in any sport and, with rare exception, nobody cares outside of that league. does that make accomplishments in that league any less sweet to the fans of teams within that league? of course not. by the logic demonstrated in this post, even a d1-aa football championship for und or ndsu would mean nothing because nobody cares about d1-aa except schools who participate in d1-aa. this argument is nothing but a passive-aggressive shot at und hockey. it is rather flattering, though, to note that sioux sports are powerful enough to draw so many non-sioux fans to their fan site. few other college sports fan sites in the nation are able to do that. clearly our hockey dominance has attracted more than a little attention, even without montana's support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4mcrue Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 I honestly didn't mean to bash Sioux Hockey, you have what you have accomplished, seriously. My point is that after living in Montana for a while, I saw how huge FCS football really can be. IMHO, locally in that region, HUGE, bigger than Hockey. Cats-Griz is a hatred rivalry, it's all over the media, even somewhat nationally. Bison-Sioux used to be on this level, but we have lost it. I think we need to renew the rivalry, maybe our game will be on ESPNU, who knows. IT's a love/hate relationship at this point, like I said, one of us needs to do something in football. I am also sick of the anti hockey arguements, or the anti bison football arguements, we each have what we have. Sorry if my point didn't come across. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigmrg74 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Twist it anyway you want but we all know that NDSU had more dominate DII sports programs. Doesn't change the fact that GVSU would wipe the floor with NDSU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badger1 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Doesn't change the fact that GVSU would wipe the floor with NDSU. so a team that beat a BIG 10 team in their house would get beat by a d-3 team? either way, this nonsense about beating BREW's CREW being easy that year....c'mon.....really guys? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 so a team that beat a BIG 10 team in their house would get beat by a d-3 team? either way, this nonsense about beating BREW's CREW being easy that year....c'mon.....really guys? Grand Valley State is a Division II team and they are one of the better teams in Division II. One might say they are a dynasty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bison Dan Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Doesn't change the fact that GVSU would wipe the floor with NDSU. Big talk when you know it will never happen. GVSU had a nice run. Is it over? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 so a team that beat a BIG 10 team in their house would get beat by a d-3 team? either way, this nonsense about beating BREW's CREW being easy that year....c'mon.....really guys? I don't think people were saying it was "easy". They are stating that it was the worst Gophers team in the history of the program and one of the worst teams ever in the Big 10. Oh, and the Bison were favored by 6 according to the oddsmakers. On the road. Against a Big 10 team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FargoBison Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I don't think people were saying it was "easy". They are stating that it was the worst Gophers team in the history of the program and one of the worst teams ever in the Big 10. Oh, and the Bison were favored by 6 according to the oddsmakers. On the road. Against a Big 10 team. I don't know why people talk about that Minnesota win so much, NDSU beat a much better Central Michigan team by 30 on their home field that year. As for GVSU wiping the floor with NDSU, take a look at UND's record last year. The gap between the FCS and DII is growing wider every year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badger1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I don't know why people talk about that Minnesota win so much, NDSU beat a much better Central Michigan team by 30 on their home field that year. As for GVSU wiping the floor with NDSU, take a look at UND's record last year. The gap between the FCS and DII is growing wider every year. the C. MICH CHIPEWAS are always tough. were they the Mid-American-Conf champs that year? or was it Buffalo? dan lafever (spell check) is a great spread QB btw, i may now be a vikings fan if its true favre signed who are the FBS teams that the sioux have played? i know TxT this coming year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 the C. MICH CHIPEWAS are always tough. were they the Mid-American-Conf champs that year? or was it Buffalo? dan lafever (spell check) is a great spread QB btw, i may now be a vikings fan if its true favre signed who are the FBS teams that the sioux have played? i know TxT this coming year That is correct, we are playing TT this year. We count for FBS teams starting in 2010 so by playing them this year we are doing it one year earlier in the transition. Which means one more paycheck than we should have gotten during this transition. I would think that our AD leveraged his friendship with the TT AD to get this game since we do not count. A sidenote: Last year (2008) your Badgers called to play but UND didn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 That is correct, we are playing TT this year. We count for FBS teams starting in 2010 so by playing them this year we are doing it one year earlier in the transition. Which means one more paycheck than we should have gotten during this transition. I would think that our AD leveraged his friendship with the TT AD to get this game since we do not count. A sidenote: Last year (2008) your Badgers called to play but UND didn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 ? Actually, UND does count in 2009. The rule was changed a couple of years ago. A school has to average 57(or 58?) scholarships over 2 years, and are a counter during that 2nd year. UND ramped up scholarships right away so they will average at least the minimum amount for the past 2 years. Interesting, thanks for the update on that rule change! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 You have to average 90% of max allowed over a two-year period. Max is 63, so you have to average 56.7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.