CAS4127 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 That's it? That's the best you have? Of everything I have written that is all you can come up with? The fact that the ND economy is doing well is not a big reason to want UND but it helps contribute to the viability of UND. Greater population, increased alumni giving, increased advertising revenue, increased research grants for EERC partnering with Oil boom in the western part of the state, UND aerospace partnering with UAV's for research and technology, lots of good things happening financially in this state and who wouldn't want to be a part of that? Put your feet back up on the desk for awhile as I don't have time to get in a pissing match with a half-wit. Knock, knock-->McFly!!! I posted this: "I really don't know where to begin" as part of my reply. Remember the old saying, "It's not what you read, its what you understand and remember" (othewise known as reading comprehension and retainment)?? Wait . . . . . don't answer that, I already know!!! See also my response to Hambone's post about one of yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 The last football poll I saw had UND ranked in the top 25 which is better than 100 schools in FSC football. UND beat Montana and NDSU in mens basketball. The other sports are all doing well. Not bad for teams in transition without any playoffs home or away! Now that we are playoff eligible and in the Big Sky I think we will be just fine thank you. So I guess if you look at the facts recruiting will not be an issue now will it? Couple questions: How do the recruits that came in at the beginning of the transition with no hope of playoffs for their entire four years compare to the underclass recruits UND has now, that will at least have the possibility of sniffing Big Sky and postseason play? How does the potential of the recruits signed this year, with three- four full years of Big Sky and playoff eligibility, compare to those signed at the beginning of the transition? Basically, what I'm asking is: has UND's recruiting improved through the transition due to the fact that each class has an increased opportunity for Big Sky and postseason play? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Couple questions: How do the recruits that came in at the beginning of the transition with no hope of playoffs for their entire four years compare to the underclass recruits UND has now, that will at least have the possibility of sniffing Big Sky and postseason play? How does the potential of the recruits signed this year, with four full years of Big Sky and playoff eligibility, compare to those signed at the beginning of the transition? Basically, what I'm asking is: has UND's recruiting improved through the transition due to the fact that each class has an increased opportunity for Big Sky and postseason play? Good question. We can't tell for certain, but there is a big difference between getting over a hurdle in a TRANSITION vs doing it in perpetuity. The prospect of no home playoff games condemns the football program. What coach would even want that job? At least in a transition there's an end game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Good question. We can't tell for certain, but there is a big difference between getting over a hurdle in a TRANSITION vs doing it in perpetuity. The prospect of no home playoff games condemns the football program. What coach would even want that job? At least in a transition there's an end game. Good point about the "perpetuity" aspect. It's probably easier to sell a kid on transition when there's a light at the end of the tunnel...but if the light goes out...well.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAS4127 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Couple questions: How do the recruits that came in at the beginning of the transition with no hope of playoffs for their entire four years compare to the underclass recruits UND has now, that will at least have the possibility of sniffing Big Sky and postseason play? How does the potential of the recruits signed this year, with three- four full years of Big Sky and playoff eligibility, compare to those signed at the beginning of the transition? Basically, what I'm asking is: has UND's recruiting improved through the transition due to the fact that each class has an increased opportunity for Big Sky and postseason play? Based upon my review of UND's recruits over the last several years, your class this year looks better (perhaps much better) than past years, and it appears, to me anyway, that your classes have gotten better as the transition years went by. That said-- and only time will tell this--whether the players you have been recruiting are ready for BSC play and a full slate of FCS games remains the question. NDSU learned the answer to that question the hard way! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I really wonder if people appreciate the gravity of Fullerton's public comments this week. The rarity of a school being kicked out of a conference cannot be understated, so for a commissioner to talk publicly about kicking a member out blows me away. Look at the schools that received NCAA sanctions for paying players or other cheating. Those schools didn't even get kicked out of their conference. The SEC didn't even kick Kentucky out after their basketball scandal in the 80s. You would have thought with their crappy FB program, if the hoops team was causing trouble, the league may have cut them loose. SMU got the death penalty, so conference affiliation really was a dead issue, not that I would have expected the SWC at that time to do anything anyway. UND fans that doubt Fullerton's position, or stick to the "they need us more than we need them" line, do so at the peril of UND's BSC affiliation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zonadub Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 OK, what if the Fighting Sioux football team doesn't win the conference to get a tournament autobid and is ranked, say, #19 or #20 in a 20 team playoff scenario? If the NCAA has any 'justifiable' reason to pick another team over UND for the playoffs, what does the nickname mean then? Same thing for other playoff possibilities... men's hockey (they seem to be teetering on that precipice right now), women's hockey, volleyball, women's basketball, even possibly men's basketball, others as well... you do not have to win the conference to get an at-large invite to the tournaments, but will a school on the H & A list get the benefit of the doubt? We do not have the answer to that one until it happens, but I have a strong uninformed opinion. If the Fighting Sioux are passed over for a playoff berth because of the nickname, it is doing harm to the school, the athletic teams and to the conference. The Big Sky presidents & Fullerton will definitely take notice of something like that happening. Let's say that UND finishes just ahead of Eastern Washington in the conference football standings, but the Screaming Eagles would have been ranked #20 had they not played and lost to UND in a conference game, which (hypothetically) pushed their rank to #22, and then out of the playoffs. Where, if UND had been relegated to the Great West Conference (or now, independence since the GWFC is gone), E Washington would not have played the Sioux and beat someone like McNeese State instead and thus been ranked high enough to get an at-large bid. What would the conversations be like at the conference meetings if the Sioux were excluded from the playoffs for the nickname then? Would UND be kicked out of the Big Sky for something like keeping another Big Sky team from getting an at-large invitation? I still believe the Montana's and Northern Colorado would back UND, but in a case like this, all bets are off. Sorry, seems like I'm rambling with a bunch of random thoughts here, but hope you get my idea. Its not just home field if UND wins the conference, its the risk of giving the NCAA a reason to pick someone else for at-large bids, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I really wonder if people appreciate the gravity of Fullerton's public comments this week. The rarity of a school being kicked out of a conference cannot be understated, so for a commissioner to talk publicly about kicking a member out blows me away. Look at the schools that received NCAA sanctions for paying players or other cheating. Those schools didn't even get kicked out of their conference. The SEC didn't even kick Kentucky out after their basketball scandal in the 80s. You would have thought with their crappy FB program, if the hoops team was causing trouble, the league may have cut them loose. SMU got the death penalty, so conference affiliation really was a dead issue, not that I would have expected the SWC at that time to do anything anyway. UND fans that doubt Fullerton's position, or stick to the "they need us more than we need them" line, do so at the peril of UND's BSC affiliation. Kentucky isn't on the outskirts of their conference and was a member of the SEC since it started in 1932. UND is all by itself in location and is the newest member along with Cal Poly, UC Davis and SUU to join. Big difference. Its hard to expell a team that has been there for over 50 years (your example of UK in the 80's) and a team that isn't a full member until July 1st. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDBIZ Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Kentucky isn't on the outskirts of their conference and was a member of the SEC since it started in 1932. UND is all by itself in location and is the newest member along with Cal Poly, UC Davis and SUU to join. Big difference. Its hard to expell a team that has been there for over 50 years (your example of UK in the 80's) and a team that isn't a full member until July 1st. I don't think Matt was saying it's unlikely UND gets the boot, I think he was saying it would be a VERY uncommon thing in the world of NCAA athletics if it happened. Which shows how rare just having the commissioner talk about kicking out a member is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planetearth Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 UND needs to be preparing for this possibility. We saw what happened when we weren't ready to move to D1AA in the 1970's and what happened when we weren't ready to move when the AC and SDSU moved before we did. The AC needs to do the same and in fact I think the AC, SDSU, and USD need to keep an eye on the Big Sky. UND will need to forget the past crap and help them make the move if and when the opportunity arises. If Wyoming can play in the WAC UND and the AC can. Just need to pick up the pace and start engaging with the Billionare Alumni. Look what Ralph did for UND. We have a couple more alumni with those resources. Gotta start thinking outside the box and rather than find excuses not to move we need to look for opportunites. We can always say no, but we can't miss opportunites becasue we aren't thinking ahead and lack of preparation means it won't happen. Yes, look what Ralph did for UND. Look at every post in this 'Sioux Name' forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I don't think Matt was saying it's unlikely UND gets the boot, I think he was saying it would be a VERY uncommon thing in the world of NCAA athletics if it happened. Which shows how rare just having the commissioner talk about kicking out a member is. But why do something to see if it comes true or not...as they say there is always a first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Let'sGoHawks! Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Sioux Nickname article per CNN http://www.cnn.com/2....html?hpt=hp_c2 From the front page of the cnn.com website, check out this heavily voted upon poll: Should colleges be allowed to use Native American sports mascots? Read Related Articles Yes 85% 63365 No 15% 11143 Total votes: 74508 This is not a scientific poll Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Faison just said on KFGO that according to UM and UW themselves, UND will no longer be able to play Minnesota or Wisconsin in any sports after 2012. Yes, that includes hockey. If you UND is called the Fighting Sioux in 2012, kiss those rivalries goodbye for 2013 and beyond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksixpack Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I really wonder if people appreciate the gravity of Fullerton's public comments this week. The rarity of a school being kicked out of a conference cannot be understated, so for a commissioner to talk publicly about kicking a member out blows me away. Look at the schools that received NCAA sanctions for paying players or other cheating. Those schools didn't even get kicked out of their conference. The SEC didn't even kick Kentucky out after their basketball scandal in the 80s. You would have thought with their crappy FB program, if the hoops team was causing trouble, the league may have cut them loose. SMU got the death penalty, so conference affiliation really was a dead issue, not that I would have expected the SWC at that time to do anything anyway. UND fans that doubt Fullerton's position, or stick to the "they need us more than we need them" line, do so at the peril of UND's BSC affiliation. Once again,the reason is simple...money. These programs make money for the league, scandal or no scandal. Same with UND...that is why they haven't kicked us out already...they think we will be good for the conference...if we are not viable after Fullertons "wait and see" they will consider it but I am willing to bet we will be viable sanctions or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Good Bye then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Frank Burgraff just came off like a complete dumbass on KFGO. He basically admitted he could not care less that UND will never be able to host a home football playoff game. "It's all about doing the right thing for the native americans". OK Frank. And in the meantime, the UND athletic teams will not have a conference to play in. Sounds good to me, Mr. Hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 All I want is for the NCHC to come out and say, "If you have sanctions against you due to the Sioux nickname, your membership in the league will be reviewed". Let's hear from the hockey crowd then. Would they like independent hockey? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Frank Burgraff just came off like a complete dumbass on KFGO. He basically admitted he could not care less that UND will never be able to host a home football playoff game. "It's all about doing the right thing for the native americans". OK Frank. And in the meantime, the UND athletic teams will not have a conference to play in. Sounds good to me, Mr. Hockey. How about doing the right thing for the University of North Dakota? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Frank Burgraff just came off like a complete dumbass on KFGO. He basically admitted he could not care less that UND will never be able to host a home football playoff game. "It's all about doing the right thing for the native americans". OK Frank. And in the meantime, the UND athletic teams will not have a conference to play in. Sounds good to me, Mr. Hockey. What is Frank's "handle" on siouxsports.com ... Fetch, Dave, ksixpack? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Once again,the reason is simple...money. These programs make money for the league, scandal or no scandal. Same with UND...that is why they haven't kicked us out already...they think we will be good for the conference...if we are not viable after Fullertons "wait and see" they will consider it but I am willing to bet we will be viable sanctions or not. If UND were viable with sanctions in place, Fullerton would have no reason to be talking about expulsion in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zonadub Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 From the front page of the cnn.com website, check out this heavily voted upon poll: Should colleges be allowed to use Native American sports mascots? Read Related Articles Yes 85% 63365 No 15% 11143 Total votes: 74508 This is not a scientific poll too bad that is not a poll of the people who have the deciding vote in Indianapolis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I took a peek this afternoon at the bison and bunny boards. There is obvious glee that the Big Sky may give UND the boot. What I don't follow is how they think UND is causing this. UND admin has not been pushing to keep the name, much to the chagrin of some ardent name supporters. The Grand Forks congressional delegation voted against such measures. It seems the majority even here on this forum are not in favor of keeping the name due to the damage it would do. I don't know what the mood is like about the issue in Grand Forks overall. Yet the overall tenor on their respective boards is how stupid UND is and how they are getting what they deserve. Are the dumb masses from those board reading what a few siouxsports people post and projecting that towards UND and all UND fans? Hey chuckleheads, UND and most UND fans are in favor of dropping the name and moving on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 From the front page of the cnn.com website, check out this heavily voted upon poll: Should colleges be allowed to use Native American sports mascots? Yes 85% 63365 No 15% 11143 Total votes: 74508 This is not a scientific poll As I stated in another thread, this whole ongoing nickname issue is turning into a total cluster ____ and is truly a microcosm of our society today and what is soooooooo wrong with this country in it's present state. This poll is on www.cnn.com and I get it isn't official but look at the numbers. This state of ND, right or wrong, will vote to keep the Sioux name in June IMO. Yet a completely rogue and unchecked "club" , the NCAA, has deemed itself jury, judge and executioner on this issue. You now have the Feds legislating/enforcing that churches are required to provide birth control to their employees even though it might be against the church's religious belief/standing. And I could go on with examples after another. It's truly mind numbing to continually watch the ignorant, arrogant, inept, ill-advised and uneducated dictating policy and standards in this country...especially in situations where the majority of citizens voice an opinion otherwise!!! End of rant...flame away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 All I want is for the NCHC to come out and say, "If you have sanctions against you due to the Sioux nickname, your membership in the league will be reviewed". Let's hear from the hockey crowd then. Would they like independent hockey? UND did win the National Title in 1959 as an Independent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 All I want is for the NCHC to come out and say, "If you have sanctions against you due to the Sioux nickname, your membership in the league will be reviewed". Let's hear from the hockey crowd then. Would they like independent hockey? Interesting isn't it? Big Sky is all over the news saying they don't care if UND is the Fighting Sioux or not. They just want UND to be a competitive member, but the NCHC hasn't said a word. 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.