Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Recommended Posts

Posted
8 hours ago, Hammersmith said:

Not sure if you don't understand or are being purposefully dense, but fully funded vs. not fully funded is about scholarships. A fully funded program is one that gives out the maximum number of scholarships allowed by the governing body(NCAA DI in our case). Or at least a program that allocates enough money to award all scholarships allowed(sometimes football or WBB might sit on a scholarship or two for recruiting reasons).

NDSU has been fully funded across the board for a few years now. I believe men's golf or baseball was the last program to reach that mark. My understanding is that all the women's programs were fully funded from the first day of DI because of Title IX reasons.

As for UND, it's been in the news repeatedly over the years that many of your programs are not fully funded. The most detailed and recent info I could find in a few minutes came from about 27 months ago. Things have improved(the Summit League required it), but I believe many programs are still not at 100% funding. I'll look a bit more to see if I can find info from last season.

Scholarship funding levels as of the end of 2016-17 season:


100%
MIH
FB
MBB
WBB

85-100%
VB (closer to 100% than 85%)
WSoc

70% (these 3 were required to reach at least 85% by the fall of 2018)
WG
SB
WT&F

<70%
MG
MT&F
MT
WT

https://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/4242553-und-cuts-womens-hockey-mens-and-womens-swimming

Get that crap outta here!  LOL.  

MV5BNjJmYjcxMGEtOTFiYi00NmE5LWI5NGMtZTQ1

  • Upvote 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Siouxphan27 said:

After the Robbins’ comments,  is it safe to say Ndsu athletic programs are fully ‘roided? 

The word you were looking for is "caffeinated".

Posted
2 minutes ago, bison73 said:

The word you were looking for is "caffeinated".

Can you provide a source that confirms the illegal substance in the supplement was caffeine? The only confirmation given is that it was a stimulant, which could be a wide variety of things.

Still haven't seen NDSU take responsibility for providing the supplement, instead basically calling their former player a liar.

Posted
1 hour ago, Siouxphan27 said:

Got a link proving it was caffeine?

Got a link proving it wasn't? Accusations made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Gothmog said:

Got a link proving it wasn't? Accusations made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

So nothing happened?

To recap, a statement was made that hasn't been verified. Somebody asked for verification.  

 

 

Posted
3 minutes ago, Gothmog said:

Got a link proving it wasn't? Accusations made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

I dont know what the dude tested positive for. It seems odd for anyone to say "it was roids" or "it was caffeine." Maybe bison73 knows something more though. Lots of stuff are on that list of banned substances. At the end of the day it doesnt really matter what made him fail, he was punished and its done now.

Posted
1 minute ago, JohnboyND7 said:

I dont know what the dude tested positive for. It seems odd for anyone to say "it was roids" or "it was caffeine." Maybe bison73 knows something more though. Lots of stuff are on that list of banned substances. At the end of the day it doesnt really matter what made him fail, he was punished and its done now.

According to 73 we always need a link to the source of our info.  That is his MO. 

So we would like a link to the source verifying it was caffeine.

  • Like 2
Posted

I won't make a claim; I'll just say prove (via link) it was caffeine. 

Until there's a legitimate source that goes on the record, it's all just speculation, innuendo, and hearsay.  

That said, if it really was as culturally benign as caffeine, why hasn't someone gone on the record? 

Posted
12 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

So nothing happened?

Oh, something happened. But Siouxphan27 is attempting to shift the burden of proof of his accusation of "roid" use at NDSU to Bison73.

Bison73 needn't provide any proof to dismiss that claim.

  • Downvote 2
Posted
9 minutes ago, Gothmog said:

Oh, something happened. But Siouxphan27 is attempting to shift the burden of proof of his accusation of "roid" use at NDSU to Bison73.

Bison73 needn't provide any proof to dismiss that claim.

I think it's fair game to crack a joke about a rival team football player failing a drug test. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, JohnboyND7 said:

I think it's fair game to crack a joke about a rival team football player failing a drug test. 

But not to come back and demand proof that your "joke" isn't true.

  • Downvote 2
Posted
19 minutes ago, Gothmog said:

Oh, something happened. But Siouxphan27 is attempting to shift the burden of proof of his accusation of "roid" use at NDSU to Bison73.

Bison73 needn't provide any proof to dismiss that claim.

Funny nobody asked for proof it was roids?????  :lol:

Posted
40 minutes ago, Gothmog said:

Got a link proving it wasn't? Accusations made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

  Absolutely.    And if NDSU chooses to let the speculation linger that it was steroids and not caffeine, that is their choice. 

 It just seems very peculiar to the neutral observer that no one has uttered  the word caffeine  to prevent all the speculation;  every article about it it was referred to as an illegal substance. 

  • Upvote 1
Posted
Just now, Siouxphan27 said:

 It just seems very peculiar to the neutral observer that no one has officially uttered  the word caffeine  to prevent all the speculation;  every article about it it was referred to as an illegal substance. 

FYP. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Gothmog said:

Oh, something happened. But Siouxphan27 is attempting to shift the burden of proof of his accusation of "roid" use at NDSU to Bison73.

Bison73 needn't provide any proof to dismiss that claim.

Unless either of them can back it up, then I guess all we have is the certainty that it was a banned stimulant and the confusion on why BR wouldn't have just said it was caffeine when he was interviewed, right before NDSU threw him under the bus and claimed they didn't give it to him despite him stating it came from a trusted staff member. 

  • Upvote 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Siouxphan27 said:

  Absolutely.    And if NDSU chooses to let the speculation linger that it was steroids and not caffeine, that is their choice. 

 It just seems very peculiar to the neutral observer that no one has uttered  the word caffeine  to prevent all the speculation;  every article about it it was referred to as an illegal substance. 

Now you're claiming to know what a "neutral observer" might find peculiar about it? I'm by no means neutral, but the caffeine explanation seems to be, by far, the most likely to me.

  • Downvote 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Gothmog said:

Now you're claiming to know what a "neutral observer" might find peculiar about it? I'm by no means neutral, but the caffeine explanation seems to be, by far, the most likely to me.

Fact is it wasnt illegal drugs

If it were illegal drugs law enforcement would be involved. They were and are not. Plus if it was illegal drugs there would have been no appeal to the NCAA and he would have lost his scholarship of which he didnt.
 

Posted
2 minutes ago, SWSiouxMN said:

So UMKC to Summit....

Where does this leave Augie now?

Ask SV. Hes on speed dial to every university president in the US.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...