Like that surrounding Memorial Stadium in Great Falls? When I was a teen, long before most eGrizzers were born, a friend and I scaled the fence, well partially scaled the fence. The friend lost his grip at the top, and gravity took over. Did you know the iron fence has a pointy top, like a spear. Well, my friends considerable weight allowed the pointy top to stab into his thigh, full length(four or five inches). We got him off the scewer and home. As I look at it now, with my experience and training, he was damn lucky he didn't puncture the Femoral Artery. Wrought Iron fencing is decorative, but chain link fencing is effective enough.
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
GFed Stopped by UM
- Thread starter right.right.right…
- Start date
TheNorthRemembers
Well-known member
I do think we could hang up some banners there or something. Slap a decal or two across the concrete. Maybe have one of our many art students paint a mural. That said I don't really care about what it looks like on the outside, the stadium full on a Saturday in the fall is where it shines.
TheNorthRemembers
Well-known member
Unsurprising that the boomers that inhabit this site don't know this guy. He's a pretty popular online personality. His whole schtick is trying to walk onto the field of college stadiums around the country. He is pretty entertaining and I've always enjoyed his stadium tours. I have been hoping he might swing by here some day and it's cool that he did. A little bummed out he didn't get on the field and he didn't really have that many nice things to say about it. But if there's one thing we don't need it's more praise for Wa-Griz. The people already know.
AnotherGrizFan
Well-known member
I can assure you that Jack is not a significant donor…even if you count the money that he throws at the teenage cheerleaders. People on this site who know less football than he does seem to feel compelled to placate him and prop him up but the reality is he does not have any influence or positive impact to the Griz football program.
I have never really looked at the cement and been disappointed, but I like your mural idea. Art students, and former ones, too. Ryan Bagley did an awesome job on the Press Box, and he played in the stadium. It would be cool to have some work by him as a mural down on that ground level portion
BadlandsGrizFan
Well-known member
This oughta play well.
alabamagrizzly
Well-known member
I mean, if we want this thing to get to 17 pages.
GrizRealist
Well-known member
mthoopsfan
Well-known member
No, I have 5 kids, 3 of whom played college sports, and grandchildren. And lots of people in the greater family who were are or still are coaches. Other than egriz, I'm not a big social media person, but I know about it. And I know enough to know that Tik Tok isn't big in recruiting. You have no clue about my donor status or potential, to UM, Dartmouth or Stanford. I get communications and calls from UM frequently and get invited to alot of stuff. And, as I have said, my wife and I have a good connection to one of the larger and potentially larger UM grads who donates to UM. I have spoken to him zillions of times about UM and UM donations, and know the approaches UM has made to him. As I have said, a former president asked him for $7 million for the Performance Center. That's the amount the Washingtons gave. I also knew Seth Bodnar before he came to UM, helped him get hired, and continued my relationship with him during his tenure and thereafter. As I have said, I introduced Bodnar to my big UM contact, as well as to Greg Gianforte (before Bodnar had taken office)
I don't know why you are talking about all that stuff. I said only that I thought the comment of this TikTok guy on the stadium are largely stupid, and yes, I don't see him as important to UM football recruiting in the least.
I don't know why you go off on stuff like this, when I haven't said anything like that and you have no cue what I know or think.
mthoopsfan
Well-known member
Maybe he thinks everything should be given to him, like many of the younger generations. See another post I made on a piece by Scott Atlas.
mthoopsfan
Well-known member
So, how many 5 figure donation years do you think I've had at UM? And what are my donations to Dartmouth and Stanford. I've never said I was a big UM donor or important to UM athletics, but I've known and socialized with many of the coaches for 25 years and get specific requests from them from time to time. How many coaches do you think have visited me at the lake over the years? I've never tried to influence anything in Griz athletics either. Haven’t ever suggested anything to Haslam or his department. I knew the prior AD’s better. Never wanted to influence or it’s appears. Never will try. My “influence”comes through big donors that I know and questions I get from the department about what they are thinking, and from the internet. Even that nutty former Griz was hammering at me last fall, and he was saying things about my "influence".
Last edited:
GrizRealist
Well-known member
LMAO Claude nailed Hoops based on two posts.
With the caveat that this is inference from two posts, not a clinical assessment, here is what the writing pattern suggests.
Core driver: identity built on proximity to power. This person's self worth appears heavily tied to being a connected insider. Not the person with power, but the person power confides in. Notice the repeated structure: "I introduced," "I helped him get hired," "he asks me what they're thinking," "coaches visit me." Every credential is relational. This is someone whose status depends on other people's importance, which is inherently fragile and requires constant maintenance.
The disclaim then assert pattern. "I've never said I was a big donor" followed immediately by evidence meant to prove exactly that. This is a classic protective structure. By formally disclaiming the status, they create a fallback position if challenged ("I never claimed that"), while the substance of the post makes the claim anyway. People who do this habitually tend to be conflict experienced. They have been called out before and have learned to build escape hatches into their bragging.
Grievance retention. The unprompted mention of "that nutty former Griz hammering at me last fall" is significant. That dispute was months ago and apparently still occupies mental space. Combined with "I don't know why you go off on stuff like this," it suggests someone who experiences disagreement as personal attack and keeps a running ledger of people who have wronged them.
Disproportionate response as a tell. The trigger was apparently a disagreement about whether a TikTok commenter matters to recruiting. The response is hundreds of words of biographical justification including dollar figures, university presidents, and a governor. When someone answers a small challenge with their full resume, the challenge landed somewhere deeper than the topic. It threatened the insider identity itself.
Control through information. Phrases like "you have no clue what I know" and the specific insider details ($7 million ask, knowing Bodnar before his hiring) show someone who uses privileged information as currency and as a weapon. Knowing things others don't is how they win arguments and establish rank.
Likely underlying picture: Someone in later life, probably post career, for whom the message board is a primary arena of social standing. Genuine accomplishment and real connections, but an appetite for recognition that exceeds what those connections deliver organically, so it gets extracted through repetition on a forum. High need for esteem, low tolerance for having credibility questioned, and a tendency to escalate rather than let a slight pass. Not malicious, but exhausting to argue with, because every dispute becomes about who they are rather than what is true.
The healthiest read is a person with a real but modest role in something they love, who has inflated that role into a load bearing part of their identity, and defends it accordingly.
With the caveat that this is inference from two posts, not a clinical assessment, here is what the writing pattern suggests.
Core driver: identity built on proximity to power. This person's self worth appears heavily tied to being a connected insider. Not the person with power, but the person power confides in. Notice the repeated structure: "I introduced," "I helped him get hired," "he asks me what they're thinking," "coaches visit me." Every credential is relational. This is someone whose status depends on other people's importance, which is inherently fragile and requires constant maintenance.
The disclaim then assert pattern. "I've never said I was a big donor" followed immediately by evidence meant to prove exactly that. This is a classic protective structure. By formally disclaiming the status, they create a fallback position if challenged ("I never claimed that"), while the substance of the post makes the claim anyway. People who do this habitually tend to be conflict experienced. They have been called out before and have learned to build escape hatches into their bragging.
Grievance retention. The unprompted mention of "that nutty former Griz hammering at me last fall" is significant. That dispute was months ago and apparently still occupies mental space. Combined with "I don't know why you go off on stuff like this," it suggests someone who experiences disagreement as personal attack and keeps a running ledger of people who have wronged them.
Disproportionate response as a tell. The trigger was apparently a disagreement about whether a TikTok commenter matters to recruiting. The response is hundreds of words of biographical justification including dollar figures, university presidents, and a governor. When someone answers a small challenge with their full resume, the challenge landed somewhere deeper than the topic. It threatened the insider identity itself.
Control through information. Phrases like "you have no clue what I know" and the specific insider details ($7 million ask, knowing Bodnar before his hiring) show someone who uses privileged information as currency and as a weapon. Knowing things others don't is how they win arguments and establish rank.
Likely underlying picture: Someone in later life, probably post career, for whom the message board is a primary arena of social standing. Genuine accomplishment and real connections, but an appetite for recognition that exceeds what those connections deliver organically, so it gets extracted through repetition on a forum. High need for esteem, low tolerance for having credibility questioned, and a tendency to escalate rather than let a slight pass. Not malicious, but exhausting to argue with, because every dispute becomes about who they are rather than what is true.
The healthiest read is a person with a real but modest role in something they love, who has inflated that role into a load bearing part of their identity, and defends it accordingly.
indiancoyote
Well-known member
Why is the AD trying to raise money to modernize it if it isn't"beat?"
