jdub27

To add on to your equation, S&D was splitting around 18 scholarships between 54 participants, meaning that the equivalence of 36 fully paid tuitions that were coming from S&D that most likely wouldn't have been here. WIH was at 18 scholarships and 25 participants.

Yet way more people know that UND won the Big Sky in basketball than would know if UND won a women's hockey championship and it isn't even close. So you think it would have been fair to cut 2 or 3 other sports instead of women's hockey? That is what it would have taken (minimum) to reach the same number dollar amount. Why is women's hockey a sacred cow and allowed to lose over $2 million per year to support 25 student-athletes? The budget cuts had to come from somewhere and anyone who takes an objective look at the numbers understands this. The fact that they made the choice that effects the least amount of student athletes should be applauded. Losing S&D was a much bigger loss in terms of ROI and participation and their costs was somewhere between 1/5 and 1/6 that of women's hockey.

Minnesota has an athletic budget of $111 million, that $2 million is 1.8% of their budget. UND has an athletic budget of $24 million (4.5x smaller), that $2 million is over 8.3% of their budget. UND was required to cut $1.3 million of their athletic budget because they have a state subsidy of over 43% to supplement their athletic budget. UM takes a 6% subsidy on their athletic budget. These are not comparable situations.

Their total net cost in 2016 exceeded $2 million. They have to raise that per year.

How many more people will sign it than their total attendance for the entire year? Looks like the line is set at 15,353.5

Should have went even deeper into the numbers but at least they put the total savings of the three programs, it's a start.

The only penalty UND will have be if to leave the WCHA. That was reported today. Unless they changed the plans, Phase II won't replace the Hyslop. Could do some interesting things with it depending on a few different things. I don't know for sure but was told that students no longer have access to the Hyslop pool anymore? If true, not sure how that plays into anything.

Yeah, it was right around the time UND and UNC applied as affiliate members and Douple ignored it. Those two ended up joining the WAC and then baseball got cut at UND. What's your point?

Tough to make UND start up baseball when it clearly isn't a Summit mandated sport. Especially after the Summit has already accepted them and didn't make it a condition. My guess is UND has to add a couple scholarships to a few sports, probably Men's Tennis since it currently has zero.

It isn't the fact that it lost money. It is the fact that it lost money like no other sport on campus and it isn't even close. Cost per student athlete was 2-3x any other sport at minimum. If you bothered to watch the press conference, cuts are done. UND went above and beyond and will soon be recognizing some conference realignment benefits. I know it is easier to have a knee jerk reaction instead of looking into the facts, but give it a whirl.

The people criticizing UND are completely ignoring this. The other option was to leave WIH and then cut 2-3 more sports, impacting even more student athletes. These cuts weren't done for fun, they were done out of necessity, meaning something has to go. Cutting WIH by and away makes the largest financial impact and while impacting the fewest amount of student-athletes no matter how you measure it.

Hard numbers do not appear to be included in press release or brief FAQ. Hopefully at some point they will be put out and put an immediate stop to all the false accusations that will be coming out.

Exactly. I hope the press release spells out the costs of what they are cutting and why, it is really tough to dispute the reasoning when the numbers are on the table. Obviously the usual suspects are already out crying sexism and Title IX but they have no clue on the actual numbers and won't bother checking into them. Apparently a sport that has a net cost that is over twice as much per any other student athlete on campus is worth it just because. I guess they would have been fine with cutting 2-3x more sports and student-athlete opportunities because somehow that is fair.

Because it has nothing to do with the team on the ice and everything to do with people not being able to accept change of a logo/name that has changed multiple times since UND was started. Absolutely not. The good news is we can now move on to something we'll agree on, confirmation already swirling on twitter and will be confirmed at 3:30.

One specific chant needs to stop. It's embarrassing whether people realize or not. Get rid of that and the criticism of those who won't move on will die down. Don't care about the rest of it but the name and logo are gone and not coming back, correct? I'm not getting rid of any of my Sioux stuff, still wear/display it and don't think anyone else should either. But I can accept its now a historical item and in fact it is not "Sioux Forever".

The multiple "Sioux Forever" chants at every UND hockey game need to stop. Wear whatever you want, especially since they are still selling merchandise with the old logos, but realize that the name and logo are gone and not coming back and deal with it. There isn't a single student-athlete left who played under that name or logo.

They never won a championship wearing the Brien logo either but they have won one while known as the Fighting Hawks. So what is your point?

Not quite sure what that means. You asked someone about being at the game because that was apparently required to validate their opinion. I was there and shared the unsolicited responses I saw to the new logo. Like I said, wasn't accusing or including you in what I saw, just sharing it.

I was. Some of the reactions I got to the Hawks shirt I had on didn't do anything to change my mind about there being a "hockey-only" group who's main concern is a retired logo. Not at all accusing you of being in that group, just stating my experience.

I don't bother with the print version of either of them, but there has been plenty of UND stuff on the Forum's website. I get what your point is, but they are literally just filling space with articles they don't have to pay for and are of at least a little local interest. The Herald is just reprinting stuff already done by under the Forum Communications umbrella. Schlossman and Miller have both had articles appear in the Fargo Forum for the same reason. Edit - That wasn't directly at you, more of a general "no need to sound the alarms" post. It definitely was originally presented as something more than it was, causing some of the reactions.

Slow sports time, so the Herald is running articles from the Forum to eat up what would probably just be Associated Press articles instead. The Forum does the same, running articles from the Herald. However the Forum has a dedicated beat writer to the football team, which is why you are seeing more football specific articles on NDSU. I'd love to see more coverage on the UND football team but there definitely isn't some grand conspiracy.

Retrench? How would anyone be able to tell the difference? UND has a good amount of say in what goes on at the REA, but to ensure that it doesn't matter, the interlocking ND has about two months to go until it's retired (and look what logo ended up on the ice in a Fargo). There will be no alternatives for the shoulder patches or the ice, it will be the new logo.

They tried to appease too many people instead of just ripping the Band-Aid off, which just allowed the issues to linger. It appears they have finally figured out that strategy wasn't working.

USD is already subsidizing their athletic department to the tune of over 60%, which is significantly higher than any of the other Dakota schools. Have to imagine some boosters stepped up to the plate and offered up the cash.

If only people would have had the foresight to suggest UND could greatly improve their academic and athletic success if they could focus on "UND" instead of the anchor that was around its neck.