Shawn-O Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 How dangerous is that job-wise, in terms of Bunning coming out and saying that before the Big Cheese even mentions anything? That took gahonas... either that or lack of brains (not thinking in terms of job security apparently)... I guess will find out soon enough. You honestly think that this thing isn't orchestrated? You think Buning talked to the NCC and the regional media without once consulting his boss? An ex-military guy? C'mon.
RD17 Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 You honestly think that this thing isn't orchestrated? You think Buning talked to the NCC and the regional media without once consulting his boss? An ex-military guy? C'mon. I would agree... there is no way Buning comes out and says the things he did yesterday without the approval of Kupchella. I believe Buning's comments are a "greasing of the skids" so that when the time comes Kupchella can just make a quick formal announcement and wash his hands of a situation he really has no desire to be a part of.
NanoBison Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 You honestly think that this thing isn't orchestrated? You think Buning talked to the NCC and the regional media without once consulting his boss? An ex-military guy? C'mon. Orchestrated or not, it's certainly good entertainment for us down at Bisonville!
dlsiouxfan Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 Orchestrated or not, it's certainly good entertainment for us down at Bisonville! Small minds amuse easily
The Sicatoka Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 You honestly think that this thing isn't orchestrated? You think Buning talked to the NCC and the regional media without once consulting his boss? An ex-military guy? C'mon. That's my take also.
GeauxSioux Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 Where the heck is PCM on all of this. I'm looking for some "pseudo reporting" on the issue.
DI IN FARGO Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 Right now I'm kind of thinking that UND does have something up its sleve after all. The mid con hasn't wanted anything to do with IPFW for quite awhile, but another team to get to 10 has all of a sudden emerged. I think UND, NDSU and SDSU will be added to the mid con next month. SDSU will partner with UMKC, while UND and NDSU will be travel partners. The admin. at UND has been trying so hard for a conference, I think they may have gotten their wish after all now. You obviously missed the comments of the Mid-Con commisioner Tom Douple. No way is the Mid-Con looking at UND right now.
choyt3 Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 You obviously missed the comments of the Mid-Con commisioner Tom Douple. No way is the Mid-Con looking at UND right now. Well, I guess that settles it then.
legend334 Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 I would agree... there is no way Buning comes out and says the things he did yesterday without the approval of Kupchella. I believe Buning's comments are a "greasing of the skids" so that when the time comes Kupchella can just make a quick formal announcement and wash his hands of a situation he really has no desire to be a part of. I personally do not think it was orchestrated...but I guess we will see in a few weeks....as far as going D1...I dont think its a good idea....because UND's mission statement for student athletes
The Sicatoka Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 ....because UND's mission statement for student athletes ... their mission statement, because the mission statement evolves around the student athlete, ... I'd guess every NCAA school's does. The NCAA talks it up great too (and we know by actions it's money first, then athletes, with them). It's the dedication of the school to the athletes' success is what makes it work or not. Either you have administrators and coaches that drive for total success (academic and athletic) like Stanford or like UND, or you have Bob Huggins and Cincinnati. I was happy to see a solid look at "support systems" in the report to Kupchella.
The Sicatoka Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 I personally do not think it was orchestrated... He wrote his own "death warrant" if it wasn't.
WYOBISONMAN Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 I would really doubt that Bunning would make such bold statements unless it was a part of a scheme to allow Kuppy to save some face and back off from his hard line on being anti-DI.
dlsiouxfan Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 I personally do not think it was orchestrated...but I guess we will see in a few weeks....as far as going D1...I dont think its a good idea....because UND's mission statement for student athletes If you could please fill me in on how moving to Division I will hurt our mission as far as student athletes? I for one don't buy that by moving to Division I we'll have to resort to recruiting only out of state kids. Taking one look at the bison roster should be enough to demonstrate their are many capable players in both Minnesota and North Dakota. Moving to Division I will give us a shot at landing some of these kids instead of having every single one of them head south like we had this offseason. Furthermore I don't see how having kids on full rides doesn't actually help our team's GPA. I remember as a student athlete how school would have been a lot easier if I wouldn't have had to work a part- time job on top of practice because my scholarship didn't cover all of the expenses that come with attending UND.
UNDintheNHL Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 You honestly think that this thing isn't orchestrated? You think Buning talked to the NCC and the regional media without once consulting his boss? An ex-military guy? C'mon. i dont care if Kupchela IS an ex-military guy, i have dealt with him on a few issues, including one VERY large issue a few months ago, and, for those reasons, there is a good reason myself and a lot of people i know call him Kup-cake.
legend334 Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 If you could please fill me in on how moving to Division I will hurt our mission as far as student athletes? I for one don't buy that by moving to Division I we'll have to resort to recruiting only out of state kids. Taking one look at the bison roster should be enough to demonstrate their are many capable players in both Minnesota and North Dakota. Moving to Division I will give us a shot at landing some of these kids instead of having every single one of them head south like we had this offseason. Furthermore I don't see how having kids on full rides doesn't actually help our team's GPA. I remember as a student athlete how school would have been a lot easier if I wouldn't have had to work a part- time job on top of practice because my scholarship didn't cover all of the expenses that come with attending UND. UND lost 5 recruits to NDSU...supposidly....those 5 made or broke this recruiting class?? I find that hard to believe....as well as other implications...As far as the mission statement....As THE FLAG SHIP institution...this move will not benefit student athletes wanting to pursue their education and play college athletics...If you believe to compete at D1 UND will find ND kids, your kidding yourself....in order to get kids to Grand Forks, you will have to get the border line kids....IMO
Shawn-O Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 i dont care if Kupchela IS an ex-military guy, i have dealt with him on a few issues, including one VERY large issue a few months ago, and, for those reasons, there is a good reason myself and a lot of people i know call him Kup-cake. Buning, not Kupchella. It sounds like you have dealt with Kupchella more than I have. My take from being at a few of the same events as him is that he is standoffish and introverted.
Shawn-O Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 UND lost 5 recruits to NDSU...supposidly....those 5 made or broke this recruiting class?? I find that hard to believe....as well as other implications...As far as the mission statement....As THE FLAG SHIP institution...this move will not benefit student athletes wanting to pursue their education and play college athletics...If you believe to compete at D1 UND will find ND kids, your kidding yourself....in order to get kids to Grand Forks, you will have to get the border line kids....IMO Where is this mission statement? This is all I could find. I would not call this a mission statement for UND athletics.
dlsiouxfan Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 UND lost 5 recruits to NDSU...supposidly....those 5 made or broke this recruiting class?? I find that hard to believe....as well as other implications...As far as the mission statement....As THE FLAG SHIP institution...this move will not benefit student athletes wanting to pursue their education and play college athletics...If you believe to compete at D1 UND will find ND kids, your kidding yourself....in order to get kids to Grand Forks, you will have to get the border line kids....IMO Ok first of all we didn't supposedly lose recruits to ndsu, we lost them. Go and look at their website you'll see their names on their rosters. We might not have gotten all five but I know of at least two of them who were very high profile football signees who wanted to come here but we couldn't offer a full ride and ndsu could and without one college would not have been affordable. To further my point if we continue to lose kids like these we'll end up having to do one of two things either we can lower our standards and start going after the kids Mary and Minot State our signing and forget about ever winning titles again or our coaches can start looking elsewhere for talent. By elsewhere I mean recruiting kids from further and further out of state or from juco schools. In order to remain competitive we'll probably also be forced to take quite a few chances on kids with academic or character issues just so we can get talented athletes in here.
DI IN FARGO Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 Well, I guess that settles it then. I'm just paraphrasing what the Mid-Con commissioner said. Don't stone the messenger.
dlsiouxfan Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 I'm just paraphrasing what the Mid-Con commissioner said. Don't stone the messenger. He actually said they would not be considering UND while they remained a D-II institution. I think a great deal of people on this board and in UND's administration have realized that unless we declare out intentions to move D-I and possible go through a few years of the transition process we won't be taken seriously by any conferences looking at expansion. His comments should not be taken as a blanket statement that the Mid- Con would never be interested in UND even after a D-I move.
DI IN FARGO Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 Ok first of all we didn't supposedly lose recruits to ndsu, we lost them. Go and look at their website you'll see their names on their rosters. We might not have gotten all five but I know of at least two of them who were very high profile football signees who wanted to come here but we couldn't offer a full ride and ndsu could and without one college would not have been affordable. To further my point if we continue to lose kids like these we'll end up having to do one of two things either we can lower our standards and start going after the kids Mary and Minot State our signing and forget about ever winning titles again or our coaches can start looking elsewhere for talent. By elsewhere I mean recruiting kids from further and further out of state or from juco schools. In order to remain competitive we'll probably also be forced to take quite a few chances on kids with academic or character issues just so we can get talented athletes in here. Once again you have proved the point about why UND is looking at moving up. Has nothing to do with what's best or right for UND only that your trying to keep up with NDSU Why can't your move or proposed move up be with the school as a whole in mind not just athletics? NDSU has grown at a fast rate in the last 5-7 years. It wasn't just about making our sports teams better, it was about the institution as a whole. I don't see anything in almost all the threads make mention of anything except sports. Its a fair question.
dlsiouxfan Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 Once again you have proved the point about why UND is looking at moving up. Has nothing to do with what's best or right for UND only that your trying to keep up with NDSU Why can't your move or proposed move up be with the school as a whole in mind not just athletics? NDSU has grown at a fast rate in the last 5-7 years. It wasn't just about making our sports teams better, it was about the institution as a whole. I don't see anything in almost all the threads make mention of anything except sports. Its a fair question. UND's move also isn't only about athletics. UND has also seen a tremendous amount of growth in the last 5-7 years and a number of new academic programs have been established. As well UND has taken some tremendous steps forward in some of it's established ones. In fact our enrollment would have continued to sky rocket if not for tougher academic standards aimed at producing a more controllable enrollment growth rate. UND has programs in area such as medicine, accounting, aviation, law, engineering, entrepreneurship, among others that truly are peers to those at Minnesota, Wisconsin, or anywhere else in the nation and our decades ahead of those at ndsu. UND was already a D-I institution academically 5-7 years a go and had we had a different president who wasn't so adverse to a D-I move because of a bad experience he had at a past school we'd probably be at the same point in the transition as ndsu, but more likely ahead.
DI IN FARGO Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 UND's move also isn't only about athletics. UND has also seen a tremendous amount of growth in the last 5-7 years and a number of new academic programs have been established. As well UND has taken some tremendous steps forward in some of it's established ones. In fact our enrollment would have continued to sky rocket if not for tougher academic standards aimed at producing a more controllable enrollment growth rate. UND has programs in area such as medicine, accounting, aviation, law, engineering, entrepreneurship, among others that truly are peers to those at Minnesota, Wisconsin, or anywhere else in the nation and our decades ahead of those at ndsu. UND was already a D-I institution academically 5-7 years a go and had we had a different president who wasn't so adverse to a D-I move because of a bad experience he had at a past school we'd probably be at the same point in the transition as ndsu, but more likely ahead. Wow your post does show one thing hasn't changed up north. There is no shortage of arrogance in your post.
dlsiouxfan Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 I guess I'm kind of in a no- win situation. You insinuate that UND hasn't taken the steps forward to be considered a D-I institution academically. I refute that statement and you call me arrogant. Well guess what call me arrogant I'm not saying anything the rest of the country isn't saying. UND produces some of the top students and alumni in the country- bar none.
UND-1 Posted June 2, 2006 Posted June 2, 2006 We are talking about the athletics end of it because this is SiouxSPORTS.com. If we wanted to discuss the academic end of it, then I would go to SiouxACADEMICS.com.
Recommended Posts