DI IN FARGO Posted July 14, 2007 Posted July 14, 2007 Just want to ask folks over here as I've done the same over on the USD board. MPLSBison (or as it should really be MPLSioux) is over on another site stating that UND and USD are a package deal just as the XDSU's were. When he was called on it he backed off the story and then said your working together which is understandable and also true. But the package deal statement he claims was mentioned in the Argus leader which is a lie. I again called him on this but to no avail he won't admit he lied about it. Has anyone seen anything in either the Herald or the Argus leader stating this? I don't suspect anyone has unless this was an agreement that came up just yesterday and was reported today. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted July 14, 2007 Posted July 14, 2007 If true, that'd be newsworthy. I haven't seen it reported. Quote
junior24 Posted July 14, 2007 Posted July 14, 2007 If it has anything to do with the Arrrggggus Leader it is reliable. Quote
Hammersmith Posted July 15, 2007 Posted July 15, 2007 If it has anything to do with the Arrrggggus Leader it is reliable. The problem is he said he read it in the Argus Leader but when questioned, he can't give any specifics and he refuses to search the AL website to provide a link. He says it's a waste of his time to produce proof and that everyone else should take his word for it. Needless to say, he's done this so often over on AGS that few still take him seriously. He's become something of a running joke. Quote
Herd Posted July 15, 2007 Posted July 15, 2007 UND and USD would be wise to package themselves. USD would benefit from UND's facilities and athletic success, and UND would benefit from USD geography. Without the package, both may have some dealbreakers. Quote
star2city Posted July 16, 2007 Posted July 16, 2007 UND and USD would be wise to package themselves. USD would benefit from UND's facilities and athletic success, and UND would benefit from USD geography. Without the package, both may have some dealbreakers. There's much less logic in "packaging" UND and USD together than there was with NDSU/SDSU because of different circumstances. If the Summit is interested in either or both, UND and USD would not be travel partners in that conference. The NDSU/SDSU travel arrangement would be broken to include UND and/or USD. If the Big Sky is interested in only one, obviously we wouldn't be travel partners. Adding one seems more likely than adding two, as the BSC would be best served with an even number of schools. Even if the BSC loses a member, a UND/USD combo doesn't help much because the BSC would then need a core DI member (SUU or Denver as examples). Even if we were a "package", GF and Vermillion are more than 350 miles apart, which isn't an easy sell. Quote
MplsBison Posted July 16, 2007 Posted July 16, 2007 Actually, UND and USD make the perfect package. UND has better facilities and USD has better geography. Quote
star2city Posted July 16, 2007 Posted July 16, 2007 Actually, UND and USD make the perfect package. UND has better facilities and USD has better geography. So a western team's travel would be: Fly from Denver to Sioux Falls, bus to Vermillion, (60 miles) bus back to SF, bus to GF, (370 miles) either (a) fly to MSP, then Denver, or (b) bus down to Fargo (70 miles), fly to Denver or Fly from Denver to Sioux Falls bus to Vermillion bus to Sioux Falls fly to MSP, fly to GFK fly from GFK, to MSP to DEN and then final connection So you either log 500 miles on a bus in what could possibly be wintertime conditions, or add one extra connection, or add two extra connections. And you want to market this as a "perfect" package? Travel is never easy but the logistics here are not a strong point, even if GFK gets a DEN connection. Quote
DI IN FARGO Posted July 16, 2007 Author Posted July 16, 2007 My feet are cold, ( I agree with Star2City) on something Seriously I do agree with you on your take Star2City. MPLSSioux oops MPLSBison once again is wrong on this. Surprise Quote
MplsBison Posted July 16, 2007 Posted July 16, 2007 So a western team's travel would be: Fly from Denver to Sioux Falls, bus to Vermillion, (60 miles) bus back to SF, bus to GF, (370 miles) either (a) fly to MSP, then Denver, or (b) bus down to Fargo (70 miles), fly to Denver or Fly from Denver to Sioux Falls bus to Vermillion bus to Sioux Falls fly to MSP, fly to GFK fly from GFK, to MSP to DEN and then final connection It's not ideal, I'll give you that. But who else can UND try to claim as a travel partner? Conferences aren't going to want to fly all the way out to Grand Forks and only play UND. Again, busing down to Vermillion and then flying home from Sioux City isn't the ideal condition, but it's got a much better chance of being acceptable to a conference than just going out to Granf Forks only for UND. Now obviously if you're talking about the Summit League, then the travel partnets become UND/NDSU and SDSU/USD, which is a whole different ball game. Quote
star2city Posted July 16, 2007 Posted July 16, 2007 But who else can UND try to claim as a travel partner? Depends on the circumstances: Summit- NDSU, Big Sky - UNC or Weber St Conferences aren't going to want to fly all the way out to Grand Forks and only play UND. The Big Sky had formerly paired Sac St with NAU, which is a much more signficant ordeal than getting to Grand Forks from Denver or Salt Lake. Now with the lone wolf travel plan, some teams will be going to single cities on Thursdays and then home for a Saturday game (or vice versa). Adding a tenth school would alleviate their scheduling issues and their travel costs would go down. The Summit League actually has UMKC and Souther Utah as travel partners, which demands three separate days of plane travel. The Summit League also has Oral Roberts and Centenary as travel partners, a 350 mile trip. Centenary wasn't added to be ORU's travel partner (ORU and UMKC are a more ideal pairing). Multi-city travel itineraries, if done well in advance and if they include a Saturday night stay, are often not that much more expensive than round trip, and are almost always cheaper than two round trips. Now obviously if you're talking about the Summit League, then the travel partnets become UND/NDSU and SDSU/USD, which is a whole different ball game.You've been claiming all along that UND and USD are both destined for the Summit. But at the same time, you've been saying UND/USD are travel partners. Those two statements are contradictory. Quote
MplsBison Posted July 17, 2007 Posted July 17, 2007 You've been claiming all along that UND and USD are both destined for the Summit. But at the same time, you've been saying UND/USD are travel partners. Those two statements are contradictory. If they're not going to the Summit, they have much more to offer any other conference by marketing themselves as travel partners (which is a much better combo than either Sac/NAU or UMKC/SUU). Quote
bincitysioux Posted July 17, 2007 Posted July 17, 2007 UND and USD will certainly be close friends throughout the transition. But when either school pursues a conference, whichever conference it may be, or when a given conference shows interest in expansion, it will be every man for himself. Quote
DI IN FARGO Posted July 17, 2007 Author Posted July 17, 2007 Looks like Terry V. has answered the question that most everyone already knew except for MPLSBison. No such agreement exists. So once again it's now been proven that MPLSBison lied again about this agreement which doesn't exist. Care to elaborate on your theory some more MPLSBison. You know you shouldn't fabricate story's like that it only makes you look foolish. Quote
DI IN FARGO Posted July 20, 2007 Author Posted July 20, 2007 Yeah ok you keep telling yourself that enough I'm sure even you will start to believe it MPLSioux. Quote
Herd Posted July 20, 2007 Posted July 20, 2007 like the FCS?? If you think that DI and the FCS subdivision are a joke, why you wasting your time and money? When you start posting 0.500 records in FCS football, you won't by laughing. I guess that depends on whether you actually play top completition at the FCS level or not. I'm sure that you won't be for most of your 5 year transition, other than a few here and there. I'm sure that there is no way the Bison should scheduling you, being that DI FCS football is such a joke. Hopefully you will stay DII, you have my full support. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted July 21, 2007 Posted July 21, 2007 They called it "3Com" but it was still "Candlestick". They called it "Leningrad" but it was still "St. Petersberg". It's really "Mumbai" but some still call it "Bombay". In the words of The Bard, " ... that which we call a rose, by any other name ... " Quote
Hammersmith Posted July 21, 2007 Posted July 21, 2007 Even old New York was once New Amsterdam. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted July 21, 2007 Posted July 21, 2007 Call it an elevator, call it a lift, it's still not the stairs. Quote
SiouxMeNow Posted July 21, 2007 Posted July 21, 2007 If you think that DI and the FCS subdivision are a joke, why you wasting your time and money? When you start posting 0.500 records in FCS football, you won't by laughing. I guess that depends on whether you actually play top completition at the FCS level or not. I'm sure that you won't be for most of your 5 year transition, other than a few here and there. I'm sure that there is no way the Bison should scheduling you, being that DI FCS football is such a joke. Hopefully you will stay DII, you have my full support. and you wonder WHY I periodically snap Jim? It's because of idiotic responses like this. TAKE NOTE! I'm taking the high road and not lighting his *ss on fire like he deserves...(PS - Thank god for Vicodan!) Quote
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.