UND @ NDSU Gameyear Thread

[Herd]

Ha. Well I never let their arrogance get in the way of making a little cash. Never got less than 14 points from my Bison friends in any of these games and went 13-2 against their "spread".96 November 16, 1991 Fargo, ND North Dakota State 28 3597 November 14, 1992 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota State 19 2098 October 30, 1993 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota 22 2199 October 29, 1994 Fargo, ND North Dakota 34 13100 November 26, 1994 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota 14 7101 November 4, 1995 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota 21 7102 November 18, 1995 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota State 10 41103 November 9, 1996 Fargo, ND North Dakota 33 19104 October 18, 1997 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota State 10 31105 October 17, 1998 Fargo, ND North Dakota 39 25106 October 2, 1999 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota 13 10107 September 30, 2000 Fargo, ND North Dakota State 13 16108 October 6, 2001 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota 19 7109 October 12, 2002 Fargo, ND North Dakota 12 6110 October 18, 2003 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota 28 21

Ha. Well I never let their arrogance get in the way of making a little cash. Never got less than 14 points from my Bison friends in any of these games and went 13-2 against their "spread".96 November 16, 1991 Fargo, ND North Dakota State 28 3597 November 14, 1992 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota State 19 2098 October 30, 1993 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota 22 2199 October 29, 1994 Fargo, ND North Dakota 34 13100 November 26, 1994 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota 14 7101 November 4, 1995 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota 21 7102 November 18, 1995 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota State 10 41103 November 9, 1996 Fargo, ND North Dakota 33 19104 October 18, 1997 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota State 10 31105 October 17, 1998 Fargo, ND North Dakota 39 25106 October 2, 1999 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota 13 10107 September 30, 2000 Fargo, ND North Dakota State 13 16108 October 6, 2001 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota 19 7109 October 12, 2002 Fargo, ND North Dakota 12 6110 October 18, 2003 Grand Forks, ND North Dakota 28 21

That is relatively meaningless data. I don't think they are cutting scholarships to the bone anytime soon.

[darell1976]

That is relatively meaningless data. I don't think they are cutting scholarships to the bone anytime soon.

Yeah dismiss coaching and recruiting. You are funny Rocky.

[JohnboyND7]

Yeah dismiss coaching and recruiting. You are funny Rocky.

Funny how all that coaching and recruiting still only got UND one championship.

[darell1976]

Funny how all that coaching and recruiting still only got UND one championship.

From 1993 through 2009 minus 2004-07 coaching and recruiting got you ZERO home playoff games. That is not all scholarship reduction. From 1991-2003 ( as the prior post refers too) got NDSU ZERO championships.

 

Also from 1991-2003  3 WBB titles, and a football title....not bad for a "hockey school" (oh add 2 hockey titles in that time frame too).

[petey23]

That is relatively meaningless data. I don't think they are cutting scholarships to the bone anytime soon.

Sorry the whole thing went over your head. I have no illusions that UND will beat ndsu this year.....just pointing out that I was getting points from my arrogant bison buddies for games that at best were tossup games and a few that UND won by 2 and 3 touchdowns.

The big joke back then was that the Fargo Dome was going to replace the turf with paper since the bison always looked better on paper.

[Herd]

Sorry the whole thing went over your head. I have no illusions that UND will beat ndsu this year.....just pointing out that I was getting points from my arrogant bison buddies for games that at best were tossup games and a few that UND won by 2 and 3 touchdowns.The big joke back then was that the Fargo Dome was going to replace the turf with paper since the bison always looked better on paper.

Your data lives in the past. It's 2015 and this is DI FCS football.

[jdub27]

I don't think they are cutting scholarships to the bone anytime soon.

Never understood this excuse.  Are you saying that NDSU couldn't have success at the D-2 level once everyone was playing with the same scholarships and were only able to win previously because they spent more money on football than other NCC schools?

 

Not like the playing field was exactly leveled, or had NDSU stopped allocating dining center funds to the football program at that time?

[CMSioux]

Wasn't changes in scholarship rules one of the reasons that NDSU decided to make the move up. DII Schools that couldn't afford it were pushing rules to legislate scholarship limits for one thing (and it wasn't on a fan site and this isn't meant as trash talk). The last few years in DII other schools were starting to catch up with NDSU - for example they lost in St. Cloud - not something that happened before scholarship equity kicked in. 

[Bison06]

Never understood this excuse.  Are you saying that NDSU couldn't have success at the D-2 level once everyone was playing with the same scholarships and were only able to win previously because they spent more money on football than other NCC schools?

 

Not like the playing field was exactly leveled, or had NDSU stopped allocating dining center funds to the football program at that time?

Let's use the example of college basketball, If overnight every team in the country had 5 scholarships total, don't you think the best teams in the country would be most affected negatively? In the short term you instantly have the best teams unable to offer their 6-10 scholarship players who play a very important role on their team and those players are now playing for their rival. A team like Kentucky or Duke this past year simply doesn't exist if they cut those scholarships to 5, in the long term the balance of power stabilizes and the cream eventually rises to the top again.

 

Let's bring the same logic to football. I don't remember the exact numbers, so if my numbers aren't perfectly accurate forgive me.

 

For the purposes of this example, I will use only the NCC conference. Let's say there were 10 teams and each team is allowed 45 scholarships. That's 450 total scholarships players available for the conference.

 

Ranking the NCC teams at that time, NDSU was at or very near the top every year, so they were more likely to get a player they offered than say...morningside.

 

If those 450 scholarship players were ranked in order, NDSU at the time probably wasn't offering many kids outside of the top half of that ranking system. So anywhere from 1-225.

 

So now drop number of scholarships to 36 for each team. That's only 360 total available scholarships for the conference. Now a kid that would have been an NDSU player in the old system(45 scholarships) is just outside of NDSU's ability to offer them because they are now out of scholarships. So some of the kids who would've have played for NDSU if they had a scholarship available are now playing for another school within the conference against NDSU.

 

I won't go as far as to say NDSU got the pick of the litter when it comes to every recruiting battle(kids choose schools for a variety of reason, not all of which include football tradition), but NDSU was getting MORE of the best players than any other team at the time. When you cut scholarships for everyone, it creates more parity. This seemed to throw NDSU for a loop for a while for some reason, but they eventually figured it out.

[UND-1]

Let's use the example of college basketball, If overnight every team in the country had 5 scholarships total, don't you think the best teams in the country would be most affected negatively? In the short term you instantly have the best teams unable to offer their 6-10 scholarship players who play a very important role on their team and those players are now playing for their rival. A team like Kentucky or Duke this past year simply doesn't exist if they cut those scholarships to 5, in the long term the balance of power stabilizes and the cream eventually rises to the top again.

 

Let's bring the same logic to football. I don't remember the exact numbers, so if my numbers aren't perfectly accurate forgive me.

 

For the purposes of this example, I will use only the NCC conference. Let's say there were 10 teams and each team is allowed 45 scholarships. That's 450 total scholarships players available for the conference.

 

Ranking the NCC teams at that time, NDSU was at or very near the top every year, so they were more likely to get a player they offered than say...morningside.

 

If those 450 scholarship players were ranked in order, NDSU at the time probably wasn't offering many kids outside of the top half of that ranking system. So anywhere from 1-225.

 

So now drop number of scholarships to 36 for each team. That's only 360 total available scholarships for the conference. Now a kid that would have been an NDSU player in the old system(45 scholarships) is just outside of NDSU's ability to offer them because they are now out of scholarships. So some of the kids who would've have played for NDSU if they had a scholarship available are now playing for another school within the conference against NDSU.

 

I won't go as far as to say NDSU got the pick of the litter when it comes to every recruiting battle(kids choose schools for a variety of reason, not all of which include football tradition), but NDSU was getting MORE of the best players than any other team at the time. When you cut scholarships for everyone, it creates more parity. This seemed to throw NDSU for a loop for a while for some reason, but they eventually figured it out.

 

Did you not just prove his point that a major reason why NDSU was better and deeper was because they gave more scholarships?  Then, when they had to recruit at same level/amount as everyone they didn't dominate anymore (would they have even been dominant in 80's if they didn't have more scholarships)?  Seems like you explained it pretty well.  Am I missing the real point (tends to happen)?

 

The key to this argument is that not everyone in the NCC was giving 45 scholarships.  

[Bison06]

Did you not just prove his point that a major reason why NDSU was better and deeper was because they gave more scholarships?  Then, when they had to recruit at same level/amount as everyone they didn't dominate anymore (would they have even been dominant in 80's if they didn't have more scholarships)?  Seems like you explained it pretty well.  Am I missing the real point (tends to happen)?

 

The key to this argument is that not everyone in the NCC was giving 45 scholarships.  

I think that is exactly the point I made, NDSU won a lot of games because they had better players. You "give" some of those better players to the other teams you play against and now NDSU isn't as good.

 

What I don't understand is why some see that as a knock on NDSU. It would be very similar to the lack of real salary cap in MLB. Its rare for a team outside of the top 10 in payroll for that year to win the world series.

[JohnboyND7]

Did you not just prove his point that a major reason why NDSU was better and deeper was because they gave more scholarships? Then, when they had to recruit at same level/amount as everyone they didn't dominate anymore (would they have even been dominant in 80's if they didn't have more scholarships)? Seems like you explained it pretty well. Am I missing the real point (tends to happen)?

The key to this argument is that not everyone in the NCC was giving 45 scholarships.

It takes from the wealthy and gives to the poor. Players who would have been at NDSU end up lining up across from them instead.

[UND-1]

I think that is exactly the point I made, NDSU won a lot of games because they had better players. You "give" some of those better players to the other teams you play against and now NDSU isn't as good.

 

What I don't understand is why some see that as a knock on NDSU. It would be very similar to the lack of real salary cap in MLB. Its rare for a team outside of the top 10 in payroll for that year to win the world series.

 

It then turned into a question of "with all their resources and history, why couldn't they win when the scholarship playing field was leveled?"  It is kind of interesting question, IMO.  

 

They are winning it all in FCS with everyone at same scholarship level but in D2 it seemed to hurt them and they couldn't recover.

[Bison06]

It then turned into a question of "with all their resources and history, why couldn't they win when the scholarship playing field was leveled?"  It is kind of interesting question, IMO.  

 

They are winning it all in FCS with everyone at same scholarship level but in D2 it seemed to hurt them and they couldn't recover.

It is a very interesting question. But in all honesty, when looking at the "dark years" for NDSU, there were still some very good teams in there. They just never won it all. If NDSU wins the championship in 2000, we're having a very different discussion about these "dark years".

[JohnboyND7]

It then turned into a question of "with all their resources and history, why couldn't they win when the scholarship playing field was leveled?" It is kind of interesting question, IMO.

They are winning it all in FCS with everyone at same scholarship level but in D2 it seemed to hurt them and they couldn't recover.

All runs end at some point.

[zonadub]

So it really boils down to being able to coach the players you have. If Rocky Hager, or in the case of UND Chris Mussman, have a problem winning because their third choice players are lining up on the other side of the field and beating those coaches, it is not a scholarship issue.

Another way to look at it, using the example of Duke having 5 bb scholarships- let's say Brian Jones signed Coach K's top 5 recruits, and Duke went out on the court with their send five, so to speak. Do you think Jones' team, even with Duke's top 5 recruiting targets, would be able to beat Krzyewski's team?

It's not only a recruiting/scholarship issue, it's being able to get the production out of the players you put on the field.

[Bison06]

So it really boils down to being able to coach the players you have. If Rocky Hager, or in the case of UND Chris Mussman, have a problem winning because their third choice players are lining up on the other side of the field and beating those coaches, it is not a scholarship issue.

Another way to look at it, using the example of Duke having 5 bb scholarships- let's say Brian Jones signed Coach K's top 5 recruits, and Duke went out on the court with their send five, so to speak. Do you think Jones' team, even with Duke's top 5 recruiting targets, would be able to beat Krzyewski's team?

It's not only a recruiting/scholarship issue, it's being able to get the production out of the players you put on the field.

No, it's both.

 

If you give Phil Jackson UND's squad and you give Brian Jones the '93 Chicago Bulls, the Bulls win 100 out of 100 times.

 

Also, it isn't always as if you are lining up against your third choice. Recruiting is an inexact science. You think Billy Turner was better than the guy who played LT for the Gophers during Billy's time at NDSU? Probably. But at the time they were being recruited maybe the other guy seemed like less of a risk. Who knows, if the Gophers had one more scholarship, maybe it was earmarked for Billy. He then gets into camp and beats out this other guy. Who knows.

[darell1976]

So it really boils down to being able to coach the players you have. If Rocky Hager, or in the case of UND Chris Mussman, have a problem winning because their third choice players are lining up on the other side of the field and beating those coaches, it is not a scholarship issue.

Another way to look at it, using the example of Duke having 5 bb scholarships- let's say Brian Jones signed Coach K's top 5 recruits, and Duke went out on the court with their send five, so to speak. Do you think Jones' team, even with Duke's top 5 recruiting targets, would be able to beat Krzyewski's team?

It's not only a recruiting/scholarship issue, it's being able to get the production out of the players you put on the field.

^^^^^THIS!!!! According to Roger Thomas UND had pretty much the same amount of scholarships as NDSU it took coaching and recruiting to beat them. UND was #1 when NDSU beat them in 1981 to start the 12 year run.

[zonadub]

No, it's both.

If you give Phil Jackson UND's squad and you give Brian Jones the '93 Chicago Bulls, the Bulls win 100 out of 100 times.

Not sure Jones could handle the 93 Bulls and keep them from just 'ballin.

On the other hand, you are not talking about the same level. (Pros vs college, to make things a little more clear)

[Bison06]

 

Not sure Jones could handle the 93 Bulls and keep them from just 'ballin.

On the other hand, you are not talking about the same level.

 

I agree, different levels, different conversation. But the point is still there.

 

The great teams have both. Great coaches and great players. A third more intangible thing is also necessary for a great team to come together toward a common goal.

 

Maybe NDSU got fat and happy with having the best players, who knows. But what I do know, is when the scholarships were lowered, NDSU wasn't as dominant. It can't be a coincidence.

[Tangolou]

During NDSU's down time they were coached by Rocky and Babich, also their AD was soliciting sex from undercover male cops in Omaha. UND had better people in charge at that time. Now during NDSU's current run they've had the better people in charge. It's leadership not scholarships that made the difference. Who's going to field the better leaders in this new era? Only time will tell

[Sioux>Bison]

Gee S>B put your jealousy on hold a minute. We played Del. State on one of our GameDays so UNI with a loss is no big deal. Our game with UM is the first game of the year and I imagine most college FB fans will be watching.

Jealous of what? 4 championships and game day you dang right I am. It's just the arrogance of some of these bison fans that bothers me. If I did have those championships I definately would not be expecting the whole college football world (you know the most watched is FBS) to bow down to me because of FCS championships. I decided not to jump on the bandwagon like many fans in he state and they sure did not act like they have been there before. We will see if any flip once UND gets back on track. Good luck with Montana, they are no pushover in the post Crockett era.......

[Hayduke]

Jealous of what? 4 championships and game day you dang right I am. It's just the arrogance of some of these bison fans that bothers me. If I did have those championships I definately would not be expecting the whole college football world (you know the most watched is FBS) to bow down to me because of FCS championships. I decided not to jump on the bandwagon like many fans in he state and they sure did not act like they have been there before. We will see if any flip once UND gets back on track. Good luck with Montana, they are no pushover in the post Crockett era.......

Well stated.

I too would love to see UND have the kind of run that the ag school had the past four seasons. It was quite impressive. But, it's not FBS. Nothing wrong with that, but there are delusional felons from the land of lakes that are insane enough to think they would give a weekly beating in a P5 conference.

That kind of lunacy can make all FU fans look bad. That's too bad, because I honestly believe the ones on this board right now contribute very well to the conversation.

[bison73]

Not only was D2 stifiling the athletics at NDSU but that designation was holding the University back as well. By making the move research dollars have been substantial and academic degrees increased. IMO the move was more about what was good for the university. The move also had many good impacts on the athletics as well.

Penn State and Nebraska joined the Big Ten more for what the University systems synergies brought to the table than what athletics did. The athletic component was the gravy in the equation.

[Hayduke]

Not only was D2 stifiling the athletics at NDSU but that designation was holding the University back as well. By making the move research dollars have been substantial and academic degrees increased. IMO the move was more about what was good for the university. The move also had many good impacts on the athletics as well.

Penn State and Nebraska joined the Big Ten more for what the University systems synergies brought to the table than what athletics did. The athletic component was the gravy in the equation.

Good post. I agree.

UND should have moved up YEARS ago, along with a big chunk of the NCC. No, not as the NCC...