.jpg.070aac38e2e0e79c9a98b167da4b0ff2.jpg)
BarnWinterSportsEngelstad
-
Posts
7,512 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Posts posted by BarnWinterSportsEngelstad
-
-
1 hour ago, ChrisUND1 said:
If you are on the fence about whether or not to go to the game today, let these folks traveling long distances inspire you! Go to the game!
If you're on the fence, bring the fence with you. I've seen lot's of fans bring part of a fence to a football game over the years. BIG GAME 4 UND.
-
5 hours ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:
so lets say whockey stays...whats to keep kennedy from swapping the budgets of whockey and vball? instead of spending 1.5 million on hockey lets spend that on vball and then spend whatever we spend on vball on women's hockey? plus give idalski's salary to pryor too...
I mentioned this in another thread, but applies more so here.
Maybe for us, WH offsets MH for Title IX and there's no real other easy way of doing that. With that concept, the rest of the sports would have to balance except for maybe taking into consideration some profit from hockey. That may be a good thing. Most U's don't have hockey and they make their athletic department work with the other sports. So how do we make that work with the other sports, isn't that what Pres. Kennedy is trying to do?
-
38 minutes ago, 82SiouxGuy said:
2015-2016 attendance
Women's hockey 16,143 total home attendance - 16 games - 1,009 per game
Volleyball 13,562 total home attendance - 14 matches - 969 per match
Women's basketball 24,775 total home attendance - 16 games - 1,548 per game
Soccer 1,624 total home attendance - 8 games - 203 per game
Softball 755 total home attendance - 11 games - 69 per game
There's more going on here than attendance at these sports.
Maybe for us, WH offsets MH for Title IX and there's no real other easy way of doing that. With that concept, the rest of the sports would have to balance except for maybe taking into consideration of some profit from hockey. That may be a good thing. Most U's don't have hockey and they make their athletic department work with the other sports. So how do we make that work with the other sports, isn't that what Pres. Kennedy is trying to do?
-
1 hour ago, gfhockey said:
Return on investment sucks
lucky the men's hockey team foots their bills
lucky some alumni foot the bill for the building so men's hockey could foot their bill
-
1
-
-
55 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:
Last year hockey was out of town during Homecoming. I do think a hockey game Saturday night will give FB attendance a bump.
Bubba is spot on with his tweet though.
Yes, hockey team was in Maine last Homecoming, my recollection is that in recent years it has been the norm to have a home hockey game on Homecoming Saturday. That should help FB attendance, and also some beet farmers are finishing up (they've had good weather). The big card though is that UND football is getting the buzzzz and therefore more fans will show up!
-
After the Athletic Department's annual income from sports, take the cost (let's say one year prorated out of the life of a facility) of constructing sports buildings (minus the donations received to help build them); and costs of: facilities maintenance and preventive maintenance, rent in some cases, scholarships and FCOA (less donations), modernization, utilities, insurance, police protection, support staff, parking, equipment, uniforms, and on and on, add in athletic department offices and personal, coaches and support staff, and whatever else there could be, is it even possible to break even in a year? Are there other donations involved?
-
Gerisch
-
I feel the fever of a winner! This thread is getting good. We need to fill the Hawks Nest this weekend and WIN!
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, jdub27 said:
I thought something similar until I started looking into the numbers. Volleyball is the first one I thought of. Back of the napkin example (and again there are a lot more factors than this): Men's hockey is likely in the top 10% of funding, if not higher. That would mean VB would need to be top 30 in spending in D-1. That would require UND to spend around $1.6 million+ on volleyball, which means UND would need to add almost $1 million to its volleyball budget. The only issue is that Volleyball is 12 scholarships and MIH is 18, so you still need to find another (smaller) sport to fund at a higher level to get the proportionality down.
If you wanted to do basketball, the WBB budget would likely need to be around $3.8 million, which is an increase of over $2.5 million (and you still might be short a couple scholarships, but maybe close enough at 18 and 15).
This makes it clear that it is possible to eliminate women's hockey, it probably just won't save the amount of money that everyone (myself included) thinks/hopes it would in the grand scheme of things. And again, it still doesn't prevent WIH from a)having their budget accurately reflect what they are getting and b)looking at taking a little bit of haircut once the accurate numbers are figured.
If Pres. Kennedy would of went through this taught process, he wouldn't need the IAC, and had it all figured out. Having said that, you bring up a very good point which may be one of the many reasons to keep WH.
-
6 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:
I believe it rhymes with Garvin Dindows.
You get an "A" for today, that is a good one and valid. There many be a combination of many reasons used to not let the IAC at women's hockey.
-
1
-
-
Just now, dlsiouxfan said:
That may be so but typically when agreements have adverse impacts to both parties they are changed or ignored. I don't think either REA or UND would sue the other party for dropping women's hockey if ultimately it is beneficial to both parties.
There has to be a big reason for not letting the IAC have the women's hockey coach come in and beg for his job.
-
Mentioned this B4. The Raplh owns the building and manages the building, not the soil. UND get's the building after the 30 years and with that the Ralph management dissloves. The sport teams are UND's. There has to be some kind of an agreement to make all this work, which seems to be kept from the public. I've heard from the beginning that this building was built to house UND men's and women's hockey. We didn't even have women's hockey yet. Getting ride of women's hockey may not even be an option for 14+ years. It does help with Title IX.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, UNDColorado said:
According to Sagarin Montana strength of schedule is 187. Our Strength of schedule is 174.
Maybe the narrative should be changed to Montana doesn't play UND.
That's great, now that's how one gives credit to UND and the Big Sky as a whole.
-
22 hours ago, AJS said:
Here's the thing I'm struggling to figure out about everyone talking about UND's weak conference schedule. Wouldn't the same apply to EWU and Montana then as well? I know they play each other, but based on their logic that UND doesn't play anybody, wouldn't both those schools only play 1 good conference opponent? I would say that's a pretty weak conference schedule as well.
That doesn't say much for the Big Sky as a whole. We apparently don't give ourselves much credit, wonder why pollsters don't?
-
1
-
-
On 10/9/2016 at 1:48 PM, bison73 said:
Cutting one program would solve all of the funding issues and save how many sports?
You're from the wrong school to understand.
-
Home base in some of the playoffs? That would energize our fans and fill the Alerus!
-
1
-
-
We've had close games, but we are improving! This team may not gel (as the saying goes), because they should continue to improve, even if they get in the playoffs. This is the type of team that can continue to improve through next year, helping the Big Sky be a repereable conference
-
12,000 Hawk fans and the students stick it out!
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, siouxfan512 said:
Absolutely, and as much as a few people like to say NDSU/UND is not a football rivalry (those folks are morons) ... playoff matchups like that definitely heat up the passion of the fans.
Playoff game like that would be huggge! That would really energize the UND fans!
-
8 minutes ago, siouxfan512 said:
It would be a lot of fun. They are the team to beat, and if they are playing at 100%, I don't know if we could win or not. We have the defense to make it interesting, and who knows what we could get rolling on offense ... but that would definitely be a FUN game. I know enough Bison fans to know that as a whole, they are a pretty fun bunch; there are just a few obnoxious trollers that come around, and the BV crowd is pretty terrible. BUT if you went tailgating up there, MOST would toss you a beer and welcome you; and add a little ribbing into the mix.
I also know a lot of Bison fans, just that these last years have pretty much all receiving on the ribbing. I didn't forget the game in Fargo last year, and they remind me. It just would be nice the have another shot at them.
-
31 minutes ago, nodak651 said:
Just noticed that this game thread is twice as long as the Canisius game thread... bodes well for football fan support, I would think.
Winning definitely helps with the fan following. I would say the fans are mostly their but become much more interested with success. The cow college success has hurt our support. I can't wait for the time that we beat them again! Maybe we get a shot at them in the Playoffs! And Oh, this is not a hockey only U!
-
Start it out with a win!
-
11 hours ago, UNDBIZ said:
The UND hockey bloggers are apparently quite upset with Kennedy for some reason. Calling him out for things they never called Kelley on and he was much worse. They must be nervous about the potential shift in athletic department priorities. Don't worry, mens hockey will still be #1.
UND hockey is #1, sure they just won their 8th Natty!!!!!!!! There is a huge fan base following hockey. UND has a large fan base that follows football (many of which are also hockey fans), which is coming alive and growing as they are winning. Now you put UND and some of the Big Sky teams in FBS and you might have to change the "Don't worry".
-
10 hours ago, the green team said:
That is the one thing about this whole process that I can't seem to to get my head around. If I'm Womens Soccer, I would have to ask the question of why "we"(women's soccer) is on the chopping block and women's hockey isn't. They have similar number of participants and I would guess similar scholarship requirements. And I'm guessing that Women's hockey costs significantly more to operate from nearly all stand points. Considering the committee is examining a budgetary shortfall, wouldn't that stand to reason that at least they compare.
I look at it at the Nickname committee. Were they not tasked with something that was unique to North Dakota. If that was the case , this was a committee that forwarded a Hawks nickname. How is that unique to North Dakota or even college athletics for that matter anywhere in college athletics? The same can be said said at those examining reduction measures in this instance. If you are truly are serious about reducing costs, the department, IAC, and president would have to take at least a serious look at Women's Hockey.
In my observation they aren't taking this process seriously enough if they do not.
You sure would think the IAC would have to take a serious look at WH because of the huge costs involved, but Pres. Kennedy says no. Sure one can make the argument that the building expenses are there anyway because of MH in The Ralph, but the rest of the expenses in WH are still huge. Something going on here that isn't in the open yet?
Another point. Sports became a part of college life shortly after the U opened it's doors . Sports were never started as a way for the U to make money, there were a whole bunch of other reasons, of which most still hold true today!
SUU @ UND Homecoming 2016
in Football
Posted
Just left the Hawks Nest, Bought 7 more tickets for relatives that live in town. Ticketmaster is stopped selling at 10:00 AM, have to get tickets at game. Lots of buzzz over there already!