UND GUY
-
Posts
17 -
Joined
Posts posted by UND GUY
-
-
28 minutes ago, jdub27 said:
Had the talent to fill the hole Q left on the court, nowhere near what was needed to fill off it. Needs to take a look in the mirror at who was supposed to take over the team and then think about why they supposedly didn't want to win enough (though I'd guess it be disputed). Geno also knows the staff and other players aren't going to publicly rebuke his comments, feel safe saying the are privately disagreeing with quite a few of his takes.
Again, wish him well, he's got all the talent in the world, hope he figures it out. It has to be eating him alive having to spend a few extra months at UND after publicly declaring he was destined for bigger and better things.
Not going to blame the staff for moving on from someone who couldn't make up their mind about wanting to be here and was actively trying to leave. That's not how you build a team.
Well put.
His teammates voted to not take him back. Listen to that podcast - on 1 hand he states how big of a party guy he is, but then he states how his teammates weren’t focused enough on winning. Huh? He claims that in high school he “never went to class”. He talks about doing just enough to stay eligible in college. That guy was supposed to be our leader last year?
It’s really an amazing story from a guy who’s where he is only because people at UND jumped through hoops for him. Geno’s shown his true colors to the public what those who dealt with him knew from the beginning. He’s always cared only about 1 thing - Geno. As long as he gets his, Geno’s happy. He’s Mark Few’s problem now.
IMO don’t let the door hit you on the way out.
-
1
-
-
We got our QB. Absolutely gigantic. Lots of buzz about his performance at camp on Saturday.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
There’s a decade worth of student-athletes who had no interaction with their AD. None. He didnt know their names or accomplishments. Academic or athletic. That doesn’t go unnoticed by those kids.
Faison was unapproachable and took no initiative toward his athletes, alums, and fans alike. He showed no fire and enthusiasm towards his university. Brian was a non-factor in fundraising. In fact he was a detriment.
Did he help grow the fan base with his outgoing personality? Engaging fans at games, meeting the average joe knowing there’s a bigger picture? Fostering those relationships that grow into bigger and better things? He did none of that and to argue otherwise is pure ignorance.
This fine university will be much much better off without him.
-
7
-
Taking the high road and not ripping Drick right now. The timing of this stinks but not nearly as big a loss as some think.
He had by far and away his best game in the NCAA Tourney L. He's replaceable and beyond that, where the heck is he gonna go?
It's an absolutely selfish move. Yet another strike against the "grad transfer" rule that's turned lower level DIs into a minor league of sorts.
-
-
2 minutes ago, Big Green said:
They would only get a couple hundred fans in the 80' for WBB. Not sure on exact year as I was young. Less than w. Hockey gets now
Terrible argument.
In the 80s there were still 100s of women's basketball programs. It was a young game with great growth potential, given the size and success of their male counterparts (200ish male DI programs that had been around for some 50 years).
Conversely there are 35 women's hockey teams. A whole 35 programs (and we're fully funded, have 1 of the best facilities in the world, and can't even crack the top 8!). On the side of their male counterparts, there are 60 men's programs. College hockey is an expensive sport with a very limited recruiting base. You don't see programs banging down the door to add college hockey programs. There's a reason for that.
As we've seen, women's college hockey is VERY expensive. 35 teams. Not many institutions interested in adding it. There's a clear distinction between "young" and "no market".
It isn't difficult to see.
-
2
-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, mksioux said:
To those people who are not following this closely, I can see why this might look like a dumb decision. The University has never really publicly admitted how much money women's hockey loses. They even went out of their way to allocate expenses to the men's team that should have been shared by both teams, all in an effort to make the women's teams numbers not look as bad as they were. Even today, they didn't talk about the numbers. And you certainly won't read about it in the Herald or other media sources. But the people who dig into this stuff and follow it closely know this was the right decision. Others may seem mystified. I personally think the University did not handle this well in the sense that they should have publicly justified their decision better with cold, hard numbers to better inform the casual observer on why this decision was the most logical one.
Winner! Thought I remembered Faison/Schaefer talking $ last year when baseball was cut, and sure enough the 1st article on google was a Star Trib article that quotes Faison saying UND saves $720,000 by making the cut.
Why wasn't the number announced today? That's a great question and a missed opportunity. If the public knew the actual hard number (FYI it's north of $2 million), they'd be 1) shocked and 2) applauding the move whole-heartedly.
For UND to get ahead and capitalize on the 2 sports with the highest ceiling left for us, men's hoops and football, this move was a must.
Some great people lost their jobs because of today's events. Thoughts and prayers to them.
And the next time anyone sees Mike Mannaussau or Val Sussex, please thank them for all they do. They're the life-blood of the Athletic Dept, they don't get to make the decisions, but they have to fall on a lot of swords and deal with not-so ideal situations. Two fantastic people.
-
3
-
-
From reading in the past, it seems as if there were some here crying afoul about UND's Title IX situation. Over-compliant, or hyper-compliant were the terms.
This absolutely proves that, doesn't it?There was some deception going on within the athletic dept from Title IX backers......or some people didn't understand the rules.
Sure do hope the higher-ups who were pushing the hyper-compliance concept are going to be shown the door. They're partially to blame for the dog and pony show in the athletic department over the past year and some months. They've added to the confusion & created a fear of doing wrong by Title IX. Which was a lie.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:
The latest numbers I have:
Operating Expense:
WIH -- $1,492,827
MSD -- $358,041
WSD -- $591,646
Operating Revenue:
WIH -- $29,239
MSD -- $31,458
WSD -- $39,194Net:
WIH -- $1,463,588
MSD -- $326,583
WSD -- $552,452FCOA not included there. Over $100k there. Nor is REA rental cost that was 100% attributed to men's hockey. $500k
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Pandor's Box opened here. A large consequence of this that conveniently none of the proponents has brought up.
When do the rowers get paid? They work really hard. Title IX, women's rights, it's unfair.
When do the curlers get paid? They work really hard (not to mention draw a lot better)? Title IX, women's rights, it's unfair.
When do the rifle competition people get paid? They work really hard. Title IX, women's rights, it's unfair.
Etc, etc, etc.
Money doesn't grow on trees. Huge problem with society today. Simple concept - supply and demand. Supply and demand isn't a Title IX issue. Instead it's a fact of life. When supply and demand is ignored things go in the wrong direction real quick.
-
5
-
32 minutes ago, SWSiouxMN said:
UND hasn't talked to the Big Sky about this? Kind of alarming.
But let's get this straight;
UND has 7 programs that won't potentially cause problems with the Big Sky (if they're eliminated),
UND has 3 programs that won't cause a $150k penalty from the Summit League (if they're eliminated),
There are only 2 programs that appear on both of those lists. 1 of those 2 loses the university $2 million-plus annually, has no fan following, sells out 1/12 of their home arena, can't consistently make the NCAA Tournament despite playing in one of the best arenas in the world while only competing against 29 other teams (a lot of which are Division II), has only been around maybe 15 years and thus has a very very limited alumni base, and provides extremely limited to no exposure.
This latest news has to absolutely solidify it doesn't it? How is this even a debate?
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
That was fun. Ran with them the whole game. Didn't back down and took every punch.....and responded. Great exposure and representation by The Flagship. Absolutely fantastic.
You've awakened a fan base that will want to do that again.....and that's a very good thing.
Can't thank the players, coaches, trainers, and strength staff enough. Just wow.
Quinton Hooker, thank you. We owe that great young man so much. Thats the type of person I want representing me, working beside me, or leading me. Each and every day.
-
12
-
Don't see the PF & C spots as a huge need for next year. Avants, Shanks, Bernstine, Collins all return. That's 20 fouls right there. Yes it could be better, but it also could be a lot worse.
If Walters continues to work hard that's another capable 4 man. 25 fouls to play with for 2 spots? You can easily win with that.
Goes largely unnoticed but Collins has really taken a large step forward. Saturday his numbers weren't eyebrow raising but his defense & versatility were a huge key in that win. Knows his role, moves well, is athletic, can defend 1-4, and rebounds. Bodes well for the future. Kudos to him for being that glue-guy.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
3 hours ago, Goon said:I am not sure why you think I need to reiterate my opinion on Women's hockey. I've covered their program for five years. It's pretty clear where I stand. I am not sure what you're calling a pot shot? I do find it puzzling that a handful of posters on here just want to cut women's hockey willy nilly.
I would suggest that these same fans spend a few bucks and actually go see the program that you're attacking. Can you name three freshmen players from this team without looking at the roster? Since you probably haven't seen a woman's game this season's UND's freshman class is really exciting and talented. Minus the twins, probably one of Idahlski's best.
It's not that easy. Can you imagine that national outcry if UND cut a major woman's sport? I would be seen as cutting a woman's sport to re-allocate money to a man's sport. I am dead serious. Our university doesn't need the bad publicity.
Lol once again a person in favor of women's hockey brings no substance to their pro women's hockey argument.
They have really good FR? Going out on a limb. I bet when wrestling got cut in 97 or 98 they had a nice FR crop too. Bet a lot of people couldn't name them either. I'd guess same with baseball last year. How'd that argument work?
People don't see how awesome their FR are because they don't care. 15+ years of data proves that. Close your eyes and click your heals together all you want. Facts are facts.
Being a "journalist" (if you really want to state a compelling case and prove your "fan-dom", maybe wanna spell their HC's name correctly...) I'd hope you'd be able to form a better argument than that.
This isn't candy land. It's a real life, dollars & cents issue.
-
7
-
1
-
NSD is always a great day.
A little more interesting this year then in the past half dozen plus. 72 miles south it's been scramble-mode the last 2 wks.
Slowly but surely, bit by bit, the pendulum is swinging our way. We're very lucky to have the coaching staff that we have.
Looking forward to all the great coverage tomorrow.
Go Sioux
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
26 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.
New here. I see & hear this false argument a lot.
There are what, 30 women's hockey teams right now. Women's hockey is in it's infancy like women's basketball in the '80's? But there were 200ish men's basketball teams in the mid-80's for comparison's sake. There are about 60 men's hockey teams right now.
That's what we have to look forward to? The growth potential there is extremely limited.
So no those two aren't similar in the least. The opportunity for exposure is not there. At all.
Another argument is that youth girls hockey is so big around here. The numbers sure don't say that. There's 1 HS varsity team in GF between the 2 HSs. In the state are there 10 HS girls hockey teams?
The math doesn't add up in almost all areas for women's hockey. It sure doesn't add up on the accounting ledger.
Go Sioux
-
7
Non-UND FCS Thread
in Football
Posted
We would? Or we wouldn't have heard about it. Did we hear about Conor Riley? Or Leevon Perry a bunch of times? Or...….and the list goes on. Athletes/coaches get in trouble with the law at UND and it's news. Players and coaches from the highest profile program at NDSU get in trouble with the law and it's conveniently not mentioned by their "beat writer (lap dog)" even though it's public record.