Maybe, but it also makes him look better to understate the donor possibilities. It makes the money they raised seem even more impressive.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Sicatoka
Printable View
Maybe, but it also makes him look better to understate the donor possibilities. It makes the money they raised seem even more impressive.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Sicatoka
TIF and PILOT is not a subsidy (direct payment). Roers got TIF from City of Fargo for building apartments near NDSU. Same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bison Dan
Or he's saying he tapped them out for the time being.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigLakeBison
Notice the hybrid tallies. That's today's student going in-person for in-major upper level courses but doing pre-req's and the "other required stuff" online to make if fit their personal schedule. My niece got into med school a year early by leveraging that flexibility. That is the future of education; ignore it at your peril.Quote:
Originally Posted by runtheoption
Again, subjective opinion from someone who I think cares about his legacy and wants to feel good about his accomplishments. That's not uncommon but I also take it with a grain of salt and try to apply some context. The current budget woes don't positively influence his legacy. The declining enrollment doesn't positively influence his legacy. One bright spot is the capital campaign that raised over $500 million. That seems even more impressive if in the same breath you also sell the idea that donors were very reluctant to part with their money. I guess I just don't buy that notion. At least not from the standpoint that we are in any kind of "unique" situation where money is less available than it was previously. If NDSU has a feasible and well planned vision for future success and growth (both athletically and academically), the donors will invest because they realize the impact that it can have on the region. As the region grows so does the available donor dollars. It's always going to be about having a feasible and well planned vision and selling it successfully. Maybe Dean's pessimism came from the fact that the plan under his leadership wasn't as feasible or well planned as he believed.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Sicatoka
Wow you guys are really way up in the middle of nowhere aren't you. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Sicatoka
Didn't Montana almost go FBS a couple decades ago?Quote:
Originally Posted by TAILG8R
Montana/MSU seem far more ready than SDSU is.
Can understand them turning down some conferences, but would be surprised if they've taken it off the table entirely.
It would make a lot of sense for us to pair up with Montana to join MWC.
Thanks for posting that very interesting data.
So und has 2694 fewer on-campus students, 1526 more 'hybrid', and a whopping 3430 more 'distance' and seems to be making their hay off part-time, distance, and non-traditional students.
NDSU has 1642 more full-time UGs.
Does anyone know if the current funding model treats all students the same? I assume it does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by runtheoption
Pretty sure UM AD is on recent record saying they are not interested in FBS right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHorns
Unlike the Dakotas, I expect these two (griz/bobcat) will stick together, given the size and growth trajectory of the state. MT has some of the nicest country in the lower 48 (right up there with extreme NE MN, imho) which probably gives them good growth potential. Plus they are natural rivals like NDSU/SDSU and USD/UND.
I also suspect they’d like to garner some trophies …
Better geography for the MWC for sure. Better attendance too. But I'm not sure they are better positioned financially. If I recall correctly, MSU is much healthier right now than UM?Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHorns
I really don’t see SMU being an outlier in the PAC and I don’t think the other Texas teams will be offered by the PAC. I do see UTEP and NMSU getting an invitation to the MWC and accepting it because a gutted MWC is still better than the CUSA. Air Force could go to the PAC if they didn’t want the AAC.Quote:
Originally Posted by EP NDSU Fan
I see why a remaining MWC member would think the sky is going to fall. The CUSA is not attractive to anyone including the current members. The MWC will not dissolve like your doomsday scenario. NDSU and the Montanas are really at the same level if not higher than all remaining MWC members once SDSU and Boise leave.Quote:
Originally Posted by MWC
https://media.tenor.com/DozZTQmVXIEA...john-candy.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by The_Sicatoka
You are not wrong. They will only invite a certain number for teams depending how many slots are available after filling with the TX teams and NMSU. If two slots open up you may see the montanas get the invite. If only one slot it is probably NDSU. 3 slots would probably be NDSU and the Montana’s. SDSU is staying with USDQuote:
Originally Posted by MWC
Don’t worry once you retire with that boomer thinking you won’t get left behind with the entire future workforce ….Quote:
Originally Posted by Bison Dan
I think the only FCS school that has a slight chance at this point is Sacramento State for football only and Davis for Olympic sports. The are a bunch of tv sets in the Big Valley. Very easy travel for SJSU, Nevada and Fresno, if they are still around.Quote:
Originally Posted by B.Schlossman Fan Club
I'm not sure I would call that "boomer thinking". I think the pandemic highlighted the fact that very few are able to learn as effectively online as they do in person. College aged students are more capable than younger students but the online education experience will need to improve drastically before it will ever be as effective as traditional classroom education. It absolutely has its place and will likely be used to help reduce college education costs in the near future but I think it is a ways off before a degree earned entirely online will create the same learning opportunities as a traditional classroom setting. Employers care about actual knowledge and the ability to apply it. I think online education currently has it's limits in providing the application experiences necessary to make it viable for many courses of study. A hybrid scenario where some general courses at reduced credit cost seems to be highly likely to me though.Quote:
Originally Posted by B.Schlossman Fan Club
Employers better get used to it because the new workforce wants online college education with a work at home job. Honestly I don’t care much about their degree, it’s more about their work and life experience to me. Farm or construction work before getting internships and coops is what I want to see as a person hiring. A degree just checks the box. That real life knowledge is more important to me because I need them to learn my way of doing the job.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigLakeBison
Honestly that map makes us look as close to the Sun Belt as to the Mountain West. We are...so far north...and so central...Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Sicatoka
maybe we could just join the CFL bro how about that winnipeg bombers would be great travel partners bro and UND could come canada loves hockey and methQuote:
Originally Posted by DePereBisonFan
One difference though is that MWC has a much broader geography and is accustomed to a lot of air travel. SBC I think likely busses a lot of their games.Quote:
Originally Posted by DePereBisonFan
SBC would be fun, but the conference seems to have an intentionally tight geography. They also don't seem interested in expanding, and probably have someone like WKU or Missouri St on deck if they backfill. Those schools are adjacent to current members, and are said to be interested in joining.
They won't likely reach to Montana or the Dakotas.
https://sportleaguemaps.com/ncaa/sun-belt/
https://sportleaguemaps.com/ncaa/mountain-west/
I am unconvinced 4 FCS schools are at the same level or higher. However, my point remains; That rather than grasping for straws with several FCS schools, MW teams with options would leave. Even if it means CUSA. UTEP would not come. I don't think NMSU would either. Hawaii has explored independence and I think would take the opportunity to do so. the AAC has been courting AFA for years. Texas State would have no interest. So that would mean maybe 5 FBS schools and 7 FCS schools. I do not believe that would be recognized as a FBS conference by the NCAA..Quote:
Originally Posted by B.Schlossman Fan Club
It would be much better to drop football and not mess with any of that.
Oh, come on now.Quote:
Originally Posted by MWC
You are suggesting the entire MWC would implode and go to places like CUSA if the top 4 FCS teams were added.
And those MWC teams would run to a conference that just added 3 much much weaker FCS schools, along with other incredibly weak schools like FIU, to form a conference much more spread out and weaker than if they stay. And with a crappy media deal to boot that has 5 weeks of nothing but Tuesday and Wednesday midweek games on CBSSN.
Ridiculous :rofl:
I have seen this happen..The Big West sponsored football. Fresno, San Jose , Nevada and Boise left and the conference no longer sponsored football
The airport meeting formed the MW but the WAC continued on. TCU, Rice, UTEP, SMU and Tulsa left..Nevada, Fresno and Hawaii left. The WAC filled in with a couple FCS schools but USU and SJSU left and the WAC ceased to be.
To suggest that the MW could collapse is not as far fetched as you might think.
Fortunately, I think the Pac 10 is going to survive pretty much intact. The MW could still lose a school or two. That does not mean they would add FCS schools. Once a panic like that starts airport meetings happen..
A new conference could emerge. The remaining schools could hook up with a couple of the best of the CUSA, Maybe add Texas State. Maybe get Tulsa back. Maybe UTSA and Rice.
I know you guys want to move up and that is admirable but adding 4 FCS schools makes zero sense for the MW.
No one is running to the CUSA unless they ditch their lowly FCS hitchhikers that are keeping the conference from imploding. These are not just 4 FCS teams, they are the top 4 FCS programs in the country. A gutted MWC would gladly take them in it meant keeping the conference alive. Most of the remaining MWC would have to check their inflated ego at the door!Quote:
Originally Posted by MWC
Speaking of inflated ego..Quote:
Originally Posted by B.Schlossman Fan Club
No AFA, No Hawaii means 5 leftover MW schools. There is no ego, inflated or otherwise in those 5..I seriously doubt even FCS schools would want to join that..No tv deal, no chance at the CFP, ever. Dead man walking..Quote:
Originally Posted by B.Schlossman Fan Club
However, like I said, I do not anticipate the MW getting gutted as you guys are are hoping and praying for.
The hell it's not a subsidy. If your taxes are reduced you're being subsidized by the GF taxpayers. Did Roers build on the campus like is being done at und? Apples and Oranges. It's a sweetheart deal between the city, developer, and und. Who's providing the utilities? what's the rent? what's cost of the rooms? Who owns the building? It's such a poorly reported story, but that's the way GF like it.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Sicatoka
If you can figure out how CFL roster slots work ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
https://3downnation.com/2023/06/07/o...s%20per%20game.
It's right there on the public agenda of the GF City Council: https://www.grandforksgov.com/Home/C...Event/9485/459 ... Item 5.2, with all the documents.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bison Dan
I'll save you some time; read the Background section: https://www.grandforksgov.com/home/s...04333077870000
It's presently untaxed (UND) property, so there's no "reduction".
The dirt is being transferred to UNDAA&F (taxable).
When the building (owned by Burian Associates, market rate shops and apartments) comes online it's taxable.
Seems GF is gaining tax base in this deal.
Look at 19th and U (Casey's) or 12th and U (Newman) at NDSU. Same things.
Anti-climatic: CU Regents meeting this morning was cancelled.
https://regents.cu.edu/events
Not trying to be hostile, in any way, but who would pay for that? Given the small size and subsequent limited financial resources of the Dakotas, who covers the UXDs?Quote:
Originally Posted by taper
It's like suggesting Wyoming have two FBS schools
So far nobody wants to pay for us, so no idea. The wants of schools and conferences are often at odds. That post was more aimed at how history has shown the Dakotas are strongest with all 4.Quote:
Originally Posted by WhoRepsTheLurker
According to 92, this isn't true. Also, if NDSU got the same subsidies UND does, I think they'd be fine, no?Quote:
Originally Posted by taper
I also don't buy the history bit. Seems you have some kind of an affinity for UND, tbh. I have none, fwiw, which I'm sure comes as no surprise to you
Here's my take. It will be costly to be FBS and be competitive. Why would the Dakotas shoot themselves in the foot right out of the gate by doubling that cost?
I'm sorry, but it simply isn't feasible for both NDSU and UND to go FBS, and given demographic trends we are looking at (and the structure of ND higher ed) I don't ever see that changing
What history is there to point to where all 4 aren't together? From 2003 to 2018? I would say that NDSU and SDSU did very well in that stretch. I agree that SDSU being willing and capable to move with us would be of benefit. However, I just don't by the notion that we have to keep all four Dakotas together.Quote:
Originally Posted by taper
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhoRepsTheLurker
Conceptually, I like the idea of all four, but you are likely right on it not being feasible for the Dakotas.
Recent G5 financial disclosures seem to show that almost all G5 schools get heavy subsidies thru student fees and/or state/institutional support. I was a bit surprised how heavily subsidized the AAC and MWC schools are, given they are the strongest of the G5 conferences, and have decent media deals. There are big costs, especially if you want to compete at the top of G5.
Only the top of the top of P5 (the P2?) make a go of it without institutional or government support or student fees. See: UT-Austin for example. There are maybe a couple dozen like that in the country from some things I've read.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHorns
I wonder if it’s any coincidence that every single poster in this thread who says NDSU can’t go FBS because of money, also says that NDSU and UND are a package deal and need each other. And meanwhile also mentions no concern about UND’s athletic budget.
Hmmm
Maybe you are a package deal in the new Gutted MW folks here are hoping for. I think in this speculative scenario you would have 4 remaining MW schools. NV, USU, Wyoming and SJSU.
Limiting your yourself to just the 4 you are wanting would mean only 8 schools total. I don't how the logistics of that would work. Unless all 8 were all sports, the logistics would not work.
So I think you need to find 8 FCS schools. That way Nevada and SJSU could just be football only. That cuts out the worst travel for you guys..With no tv deal Nevada would have no interest in housing their olympic sports in your Central Time, FCS centric conference. Nevada basketball is valuable and would be fine in the WCC or even the Big West. Utah State as well.
So who would you see as the other 4 FCS schools to add..?
This thread has a bad habit at looking solely at football. We're an educational institution with many more aspects to consider. I'm on record believing that Johnson v NCAA will make athletes paid employees in the not too distant future. That's going to be a massive NCAA shakeup that not all programs will survive. I think the 4 Dakotas make it if we stick together, and in the ensuing chaos a block of 4 schools that will never leave each other is a solid foundation of a conference.
If I'm wrong about Johnson then maybe I'm wrong about what follows, but I'm pretty sure it'll happen. Don't think I like the death of amateur athletics but it's going to happen.