The Sicatoka Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 I believe M/W BB, MH, VB, and FB are completely safe. Heck, M/W BB are Summit mandatory. FB is going MVFC. MH is going nowhere. And VB is solid ROI. There's five. I also believe M/W T&F/CC are just fine. That's (ready?) SIX teams because T&F counts Indoor and Outdoor as separate teams. And we have the HPC. There's eleven. (Oh, and UND would be above Summit minimum here.) What's the remaining nine left to look at? M/W Golf, M/W Tennis, M/W S&D, W Hoc, W Soft, W Soc. To me, now it comes down to facilities now and for the next ten years for the teams. On a personal note, I'd like to stay at 16 teams*. *This is where I'd really like to be radical and say dump everything in the "remaining nine" except the two cheapest and then add M/W lacrosse as spring spectator (better revenue potential) sports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarnWinterSportsEngelstad Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 8 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: I believe M/W BB, MH, VB, and FB are completely safe. Heck, M/W BB are Summit mandatory. FB is going MVFC. MH is going nowhere. And VB is solid ROI. There's five. I also believe M/W T&F/CC are just fine. That's (ready?) SIX teams because T&F counts Indoor and Outdoor as separate teams. And we have the HPC. There's eleven. (Oh, and UND would be above Summit minimum here.) What's the remaining nine left to look at? M/W Golf, M/W Tennis, M/W S&D, W Hoc, W Soft, W Soc. To me, now it comes down to facilities now and for the next ten years for the teams. On a personal note, I'd like to stay at 16 teams*. *This is where I'd really like to be radical and say dump everything in the "remaining nine" except the two cheapest and then add M/W lacrosse as spring spectator (better revenue potential) sports. WH is not in your mix, there not going anywhere. We are not adding sports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 3 minutes ago, BarnWinterSportsEngelstad said: We are not adding sports. Don't smash my dream. Don't crush my butterfly. Don't harsh my mellow. (But yeah, we aren't trading sports, dropping and adding different, in this economic climate.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 6 minutes ago, BarnWinterSportsEngelstad said: You need to take WH out of your mix, there not going anywhere. You know what I think of sacred cows? They're fabulous with South American sauce on the grill. Quite sincerely, women's hockey must be evaluated objectively. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarnWinterSportsEngelstad Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 1 minute ago, The Sicatoka said: Don't smash my dream. Don't crush my butterfly. Don't harsh my mellow. (But yeah, we aren't trading sports, dropping and adding different, in this economic climate.) Didn't mean to be so direct, you replied before I could edit. You get two free shots at me, enjoy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxphan27 Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 37 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: Ouch. Sunuva ... someone call a chiropractor. My shoulder just came out patting myself on the back. I hope you're right. I however don't get the same vibe as you do from Kennedy that he is some sort of methodical mastermind and has this all figured out. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDColorado Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 40 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: Ouch. Sunuva ... someone call a chiropractor. My shoulder just came out patting myself on the back. There it is! I really think this was his play all along...politicians and presidents like plausible deniability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Just now, BarnWinterSportsEngelstad said: Didn't mean to be so direct, you replied before I could edit. You get two free shots at me, enjoy! We're all good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarnWinterSportsEngelstad Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: You know what I think of sacred cows? They're fabulous with South American sauce on the grill. Quite sincerely, women's hockey must be evaluated objectively. Objectively, MH & WH play in The Ralph and The Ralph makes money. It was bought and paid for before the first puck was dropped, go figure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, Siouxphan27 said: I hope you're right. I however don't get the same vibe as you do from Kennedy that he is some sort of methodical mastermind and has this all figured out. Is Kennedy this smart about UND and ND politics walking in the door? No. Now, if Kennedy maybe had a good job mentor for a few days, say his predecessor, and then maybe a guy who maybe knows his way around ND politics to maybe clue Kennedy in about what's on the horizon in Bismarck. Maybe Kennedy could be advised put together a long game something like this. But alas, all Kennedy had for a predecessor was ... Ed Schafer. Oh ... wait ... didn't Ed get inside all the details of UND and have some kinda experience in Bismarck? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 I get what you're saying, but I'm pretty sure there's a better ROI on WBB and WVB than WIH. If we have to have some womens sports that are guaranteed fiscal losers we need to pick the smallest fiscal losers. That's the "objective" I'm looking for. Now, if WH, because it has facilities (see: MH) is a better fiscal option than < insert sport here > show me the number and I'll gladly listen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWSiouxMN Posted February 1, 2017 Author Share Posted February 1, 2017 52 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: Ouch. Sunuva ... someone call a chiropractor. My shoulder just came out patting myself on the back. Tell me your ways Sic. How do you do it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxphan27 Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 17 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: Is Kennedy this smart about UND and ND politics walking in the door? No. Now, if Kennedy maybe had a good job mentor for a few days, say his predecessor, and then maybe a guy who maybe knows his way around ND politics to maybe clue Kennedy in about what's on the horizon in Bismarck. Maybe Kennedy could be advised put together a long game something like this. But alas, all Kennedy had for a predecessor was ... Ed Schafer. Oh ... wait ... didn't Ed get inside all the details of UND and have some kinda experience in Bismarck? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB Cooper Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Cut - M/W golf(Cause why not?), M/W Swimming&Diving(bye bye hyslop) , M/W Tennis. Keeping W hockey whether we like it or not. Also I think Womens Softball stays cause, well, just cause. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 18 minutes ago, SWSiouxMN said: Tell me your ways Sic. How do you do it? Clean living. Definitely clean living. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 28 minutes ago, SWSiouxMN said: Tell me your ways Sic. How do you do it? OK, serious answer? Kennedy is a former R politico. So is Schafer. And Kennedy just seems like a reach-across-the-aisle consensus builder based on his political and academic resume. Ed did the ax man work. Kennedy needed to make nice-nice with faculty after that. What better way to do that than to allow them to "control" one of their bogeymen (Athletics) and take their recommendations so it seems that he respects and values them and their opinions. Instant bridge building. However, going in, we all know what academics do best: Nothing. Their recommendation was cut nothing == do nothing. Between Schafer and Kennedy I suspect they knew that outcome was quite likely. (Worst case: they say "Cut X" and Kennedy is just doing what they told him. Win-win.) So now Kennedy has built that bridge and he's not the man in the black hood (that's now Doug Bergum) doing what should've been done four months ago. Better for Kennedy? He gets to cry "I'm a victim of Bismarck too!" to the faculty ... and they'll buy it. I should've bought popcorn before this one. Then again, I should be selling popcorn in Fargo watching them try to figure out where to find 12.2% ($18M) to cut. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfhockey Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Where is the news on ndsu? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Here I thought Ed Schafer did all the cutting so the "next president will have a clean slate." Whatever narrative fits the moment I guess. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 6 minutes ago, Cratter said: Here I thought Ed Schafer did all the cutting so the "next president will have a clean slate." Whatever narrative fits the moment I guess. It was, and then Dalrymple showed up with his State budget, and then Bergum to a chainsaw to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 11 minutes ago, gfhockey said: Where is the news on ndsu? The "Moo U" thread. http://forum.siouxsports.com/topic/23247-moo-u-diaries/?page=59 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Just now, The Sicatoka said: It was, and then Dalrymple showed up with his State budget, and then Bergum to a chainsaw to that. Just remember you can't believe what President Kennedy ever says because he's a politician and just tells people what they want to hear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 1 minute ago, Cratter said: Just remember you can't believe what President Kennedy ever says because he's a politician and just tells people what they want to hear. Q: How do you know if a politician is lying? A: Their lips are moving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDMOORHEAD Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 8 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: Q: How do you know if a politician is lying? A: Their lips are moving. I work with some guys like that. I guess they should've been politicians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodakvindy Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 1 hour ago, The Sicatoka said: I get what you're saying, but I'm pretty sure there's a better ROI on WBB and WVB than WIH. If we have to have some womens sports that are guaranteed fiscal losers we need to pick the smallest fiscal losers. That's the "objective" I'm looking for. Now, if WH, because it has facilities (see: MH) is a better fiscal option than < insert sport here > show me the number and I'll gladly listen. Womens hockey can win a national championship and produce Olympians. That is a level of media exposure the other two cannot reach. With better marketing it has revenue potential. Cutting it would be like cutting womens basketball in the mid 80s. I do think a coaching change is probably due. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIOUXFAN97 Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 4 minutes ago, nodakvindy said: Womens hockey can win a national championship and produce Olympians. That is a level of media exposure the other two cannot reach. With better marketing it has revenue potential. Cutting it would be like cutting womens basketball in the mid 80s. I do think a coaching change is probably due. never...nope...won't happen...ever 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.