2025-2026 Season

[Long Snapper 92]

13 minutes ago, sioux24/7 said:

12-12 and 6-2 in the conference, about as good of a start as you could have expected. The back half of the schedule begins Thursday at St. Thomas and would say it’s a tougher half then the first. Looking at it, I would say there are 3 or 4 that I fully expect to win (@ USD is the questionable), otherwise will need to steal a game or 3. 9-7 conference finish is the minimum, in my opinion. 

We're going to win the conference. This team may not be the most talented team off all time, but they're gritty and have that "it" factor! 

[GoodGood]

Anyone know where I can place a future on UND winning the conference? Year 7 was always the year!! 

[GoodGood]

Combined record of UNDs conference wins 24-69 (25.8%) 

[sioux24/7]

There’s been a lot of talk about how down the Summit is this year and I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong but just wanted to take a look so this chart is based off KenPom. Only one year since being in the league have we been “above average”.

[Long Snapper 92]

42 minutes ago, sioux24/7 said:

There’s been a lot of talk about how down the Summit is this year and I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong but just wanted to take a look so this chart is based off KenPom. Only one year since being in the league have we been “above average”.

Thanks for the graph! All I got to say….

OUCH! 

[F'nHawks]

3 hours ago, sioux24/7 said:

There’s been a lot of talk about how down the Summit is this year and I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong but just wanted to take a look so this chart is based off KenPom. Only one year since being in the league have we been “above average”.

Crazy that even though we are currently in the top 3 of Summit League in 2026 that we can be that far below the top 3 average.  Or is the graph not based on conference standings and purely based on KenPom...

[sioux24/7]

3 minutes ago, F'nHawks said:

Crazy that even though we are currently in the top 3 of Summit League in 2026 that we can be that far below the top 3 average.  Or is the graph not based on conference standings and purely based on KenPom...

Purely KenPom. So big hole from the non-con.

[Long Snapper 92]

1 hour ago, sioux24/7 said:

Purely KenPom. So big hole from the non-con.

And combo that with we really haven’t beat anyone good in conference play

[UND92,96]

I was looking for relatively impressive non-conference wins for Summit teams, and they're pretty few and far between. Denver actually has by far the best win, at #89 Colorado St. They have also beaten #149 Montana St. and won at #188 Northern Colorado. 

The next best after Denver's win at CSU? Believe it or not, UND with its win over #123 Winthrop.

NDSU has wins over #136 Southern Illinois, #151 Montana and #156 Drake.

St. Thomas doesn't really have any particularly good non-conference wins, with their best being over #188 Northern Colorado and #192 Portland.

Omaha won at #153 Portland St.

ORU has wins over #149 Montana St. and #165 Kennesaw St.

USD and SDSU haven't beaten any non-conference opponents ranked any higher than the low 200s.

[sioux24/7]

I do wonder if we flip the results in some of the UC Riverside, CSUN, Montana and WIU games, where we would be in KenPom. Regardless, in a 1 bid league all that really matters is the SLT in March. 

[SIOUXFAN97]

2 hours ago, UND92,96 said:

I was looking for relatively impressive non-conference wins for Summit teams, and they're pretty few and far between. Denver actually has by far the best win, at #89 Colorado St. They have also beaten #149 Montana St. and won at #188 Northern Colorado. 

The next best after Denver's win at CSU? Believe it or not, UND with its win over #123 Winthrop.

NDSU has wins over #136 Southern Illinois, #151 Montana and #156 Drake.

St. Thomas doesn't really have any particularly good non-conference wins, with their best being over #188 Northern Colorado and #192 Portland.

Omaha won at #153 Portland St.

ORU has wins over #149 Montana St. and #165 Kennesaw St.

USD and SDSU haven't beaten any non-conference opponents ranked any higher than the low 200s.

don't wanna pat myself on the back but i single handedly was the 6th man in the big winthrop win.....

wilson still has zero points.

[GoodGood]

5 hours ago, Long Snapper 92 said:

And combo that with we really haven’t beat anyone good in conference play

Wins in St Paul and Fargo would beat the fraud allegations 

[UND92,96]

I could be wrong on this, but I believe the rule is that a student-athlete can get a 5th year of eligibility if he played in less than 30% of a team's games in any one of his four years. In his one year at Iowa State, Eli King played in 9 out of the Cyclones' 33 games, or just over 27%, which would seem to mean he still has one more year if he chooses to use it. That's not to say that he'd necessarily choose to stay at UND for a hypothetical 5th year if serious money is offered elsewhere, but it would be great for him if the 31 minutes he played at Iowa State didn't end up costing him a year of eligibility. And obviously it would be huge for UND to potentially have him for another year.

[SIOUXFAN97]

20 minutes ago, UND92,96 said:

I could be wrong on this, but I believe the rule is that a student-athlete can get a 5th year of eligibility if he played in less than 30% of a team's games in any one of his four years. In his one year at Iowa State, Eli King played in 9 out of the Cyclones' 33 games, or just over 27%, which would seem to mean he still has one more year if he chooses to use it. That's not to say that he'd necessarily choose to stay at UND for a hypothetical 5th year if serious money is offered elsewhere, but it would be great for him if the 31 minutes he played at Iowa State didn't end up costing him a year of eligibility. And obviously it would be huge for UND to potentially have him for another year.

lfg!

[GoodGood]

27 minutes ago, UND92,96 said:

I could be wrong on this, but I believe the rule is that a student-athlete can get a 5th year of eligibility if he played in less than 30% of a team's games in any one of his four years. In his one year at Iowa State, Eli King played in 9 out of the Cyclones' 33 games, or just over 27%, which would seem to mean he still has one more year if he chooses to use it. That's not to say that he'd necessarily choose to stay at UND for a hypothetical 5th year if serious money is offered elsewhere, but it would be great for him if the 31 minutes he played at Iowa State didn't end up costing him a year of eligibility. And obviously it would be huge for UND to potentially have him for another year.

I’ve never heard of this 30% rule. I’m pretty sure he’d have to get a medical redshirt to get another year 

[Kab]

Any news on Anderson 

[UND92,96]

8 minutes ago, GoodGood said:

I’ve never heard of this 30% rule. I’m pretty sure he’d have to get a medical redshirt to get another year 

As I said, I could be wrong. But while this is far from official, I found this:

Quote

AI Overview

 

 

 

In NCAA Division I basketball, a student-athlete can play in a maximum of 

four games(or up to 30% of the season, whichever is greater, though four is the standard benchmark for redshirting) without losing a full year of eligibility. This rule applies to regular-season contests, allowing players to retain a "redshirt" season. 

Key details on eligibility:

• Redshirt Rule: Athletes must not compete in more than four games to utilize a redshirt year.
• Injury Exceptions: If an athlete suffers a season-ending injury, they may be eligible for a medical redshirt (or "medical hardship waiver") if they played in fewer than 30% of games and before the midway point of the season.
• Timing: The competition must occur within the designated "five-year clock" to use four seasons of eligibility.
• Conference Variations: Rules may slightly vary between NCAA Divisions I, II, and III. 

[GoodGood]

25 minutes ago, UND92,96 said:

As I said, I could be wrong. But while this is far from official, I found this:

This is what I found so I’m not sure. I’m sure someone will sue the NCAA and he’ll get another year regardless 

[southpaw]

The fact it says less than instead of fewer than is a red flag. Not to mention that AI information via Google and other search engines is wrong way too often, I wouldn't trust it

[UND92,96]

13 hours ago, southpaw said:

The fact it says less than instead of fewer than is a red flag. Not to mention that AI information via Google and other search engines is wrong way too often, I wouldn't trust it

Upon further review, I believe the AI answer to my question misunderstood the difference between the current college football and basketball redshirt rules. In football, you can play in up to four games, or roughly 30-35% of the total, and still maintain a redshirt (and there's serious discussion about upping the limit to nine games). In basketball, for whatever reason, the rule is completely different, as you can't even play one game and maintain a non-medical redshirt.

I have to think the basketball redshirt rule will be challenged legally in the near future, as it seems completely illogical for the rules to be so dramatically different. In any event, I still believe players like King would have a strong argument for a waiver. Playing 31 minutes as a true freshman doesn't seem like it should count as a year of eligibility within the five-year window.

[coachdags]